From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S937008AbXGMP3l (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jul 2007 11:29:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S936846AbXGMP26 (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jul 2007 11:28:58 -0400 Received: from [212.12.190.103] ([212.12.190.103]:32935 "EHLO raad.intranet" rhost-flags-FAIL-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S936712AbXGMP25 (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jul 2007 11:28:57 -0400 From: Al Boldi To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Kexec jump: The first step to kexec base hibernation Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 18:28:56 +0300 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 References: <200707130808.31109.a1426z@gawab.com> In-Reply-To: <200707130808.31109.a1426z@gawab.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200707131828.56810.a1426z@gawab.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday, 13 July 2007 19:32, Huang, Ying wrote: > > On Thu, 2007-07-12 at 20:06 -0700, david@lang.hm wrote: > > > >> I agree, a stipped down hibernate kernel can be very small, not > > > >> allocating this memory until it's needed is a step for the final > > > >> polishing. > > > > > > > > I'm not sure if I agree with that. In any case, having to use two > > > > different kernels for hibernation would be a big drawback. > > > > > > I see it as a big advantage to not have to use the main kernel for the > > > suspend. please keep it as an option at least. > > > > Yes. It has additional bonus to make it possible to write/read image > > from a program other than main kernel. For example, for a specific > > mobile device product (Such as Intel MID), a customized ultra-small > > program (or kernel) can be composed to write/read image. That way, the > > hibernate/resume time can be reduced to minimal. Sounds great! > You don't need kexec for that. This is how the userland hibernation (aka > uswsusp) works. I don't think so. uswsusp runs under the normal kernel which implies an interdependency, whereas a device driver stub'd with a small single proc kernel would run in its own space. The question is, how small could this kernel stub be made and still leverage the device driver pool? Thanks! -- Al