From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758810AbXGIEps (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jul 2007 00:45:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751630AbXGIEpl (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jul 2007 00:45:41 -0400 Received: from smtp110.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([209.191.85.220]:23514 "HELO smtp110.mail.mud.yahoo.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751602AbXGIEpk (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jul 2007 00:45:40 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com.au; h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:X-Accept-Language:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=R7sMQ+SYCJo/d7MrtArNQqv0ZRFgd739/mv/VBznOB5veK04Xkh7T5MmzTeGOLqrNyovy0o40fjlUY8Mt9FQ+T/H4VoQlJku2YeTfHb3nHE9Ur/7QkKzWWbb84wXorDM0hGNIVT/hUf1mOcpKd3SXoa8LYCtWKS2wLNmOHKadzI= ; X-YMail-OSG: dEhErGwVM1mNSXgnFr2vil4sddRrHGm4xBJVquCp8B.MtkQMo5h3X1FHaXZHFy68YVOiQ4.rhw-- Message-ID: <4691BD6F.8000809@yahoo.com.au> Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 14:45:35 +1000 From: Nick Piggin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20051007 Debian/1.7.12-1 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jeremy Maitin-Shepard CC: Al Boldi , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton Subject: Re: Hibernation Redesign References: <200707081737.21932.a1426z@gawab.com> <87tzsew712.fsf@jbms.ath.cx> <4691B9A5.6060203@yahoo.com.au> <87k5taw5vc.fsf@jbms.ath.cx> In-Reply-To: <87k5taw5vc.fsf@jbms.ath.cx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Jeremy Maitin-Shepard wrote: > Nick Piggin writes: >>This is the Morton method, isn't it? :) I remember it sounding like a >>very good idea when he brought it up, but I can't remember the details >>of why it was rejected or what the problems were. > > > Perhaps he did bring it up before I did. Please forward me a link to > the thread or other reference if you can find it, as I'd be interested > in reading it. Sent in the next mail. >>I suspect that freeing memory on the fly for the new kernel >>would be non-trivial (but possible), however simply having a reserve >>RAM region for the new kernel would be fine for a first step. > > > Freeing memory on the fly should be extremely easy for the kernel (this > is precisely what it does when it needs to satisfy an allocation). Note > that the memory allocated need not be contiguous. Yes, I have a rough idea about how page reclaim works. But I just mean it would not be trivial to load the new kernel into physically discontiguous memory. Possible of course, but I don't think kexec or the setup code could quite cope ATM. -- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.