From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759361AbXGQFmd (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jul 2007 01:42:33 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752870AbXGQFm0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jul 2007 01:42:26 -0400 Received: from smtp-out002.kontent.com ([81.88.40.216]:35926 "EHLO smtp-out.kontent.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752300AbXGQFmZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jul 2007 01:42:25 -0400 From: Oliver Neukum To: Joseph Fannin Subject: Re: Hibernating To Swap Considered Harmful Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 07:44:07 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 Cc: Jeremy Maitin-Shepard , david@lang.hm, "Rafael J. Wysocki" , "Huang, Ying" , Andrew Morton , Pavel Machek , nigel@nigel.suspend2.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org References: <200707121453.49616.rjw@sisk.pl> <87odig1idx.fsf@jbms.ath.cx> <20070717001239.GB20082@nineveh.local> In-Reply-To: <20070717001239.GB20082@nineveh.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200707170744.08191.oliver@neukum.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Am Dienstag 17 Juli 2007 schrieb Joseph Fannin: > Why are all these workarounds preferred, instead of proper suspend > support for swap files? > > IOW, what reasons are there to *not* support swap files, other than the > hit-and-miss Linux suspend support? If yoi want to go the kexec route to hibernation, the dumping kernel would need to mount the filesystem to write to a file. Therefore the suspending kernel would need to sync to disk and lock that file. Regards Oliver