From: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
To: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
nigel@nigel.suspend2.net,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Jeremy Maitin-Shepard <jbms@cmu.edu>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org,
Kexec Mailing List <kexec@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernation: kexec jump
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 18:48:29 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070827184829.GB4104@ucw.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1188177280.3247.37.camel@caritas-dev.intel.com>
Hi!
> To support jumping back from kexeced kernel, before executing the new
> kernel, the devices are put into quiescent state (to be fully
> implemented), and the state of devices and CPU is saved. After jumping
> back from kexeced kernel, the state of devices and CPU are restored
> accordingly. The devices/CPU state save/restore code of software
> suspend is called to implement corresponding function.
>
> Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>
Looks quite ok to me...
> Index: linux-2.6.23-rc3/include/asm-i386/kexec.h
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.23-rc3.orig/include/asm-i386/kexec.h 2007-08-25 21:56:54.000000000 +0800
> +++ linux-2.6.23-rc3/include/asm-i386/kexec.h 2007-08-25 21:57:00.000000000 +0800
> @@ -94,6 +94,10 @@
> unsigned long start_address,
> unsigned int has_pae) ATTRIB_NORET;
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_KEXEC_JUMP
> +extern asmlinkage int machine_kexec_real_jump(void *buf);
> +#endif
Is it really neccessery to have ifdef here?
> +#ifdef CONFIG_KEXEC_JUMP
> +#define KEXEC_JUMP_FLAG_IS_KEXECED_KERNEL 0x1
> +#endif /* CONFIG_KEXEC_JUMP */
And here? ... It would be nice to use slightly shorter identifier.
'KJUMP_IS_KEXECED' should be enough.
> +/*
> + * Must be relocatable PIC code callable as a C function
> + */
> +#define HALF_PAGE_ALIGNED (1 << (PAGE_SHIFT-1))
> +
> +#define EBX 0x0
> +#define ESI 0x4
> +#define EDI 0x8
> +#define EBP 0xc
> +#define ESP 0x10
> +#define CR0 0x14
> +#define CR3 0x18
> +#define CR4 0x1c
> +#define FLAG 0x20
> +#define RET 0x24
Hmm, is this enough? Should it use struct ptregs for normal registers?
What about segment registers -- they could change between kernel
version. Should some kind of 'version of kjump protocol' be
introduced?
What about CX/DX/fpu state? GDT pointer?
Actually I think that you _do_ need to save FPU. You should probably
use relevant swsusp parts here.
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-08-31 8:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-08-27 1:14 Huang, Ying
2007-08-27 18:48 ` Pavel Machek [this message]
2007-08-31 8:27 ` Huang, Ying
2007-09-03 3:11 ` Pavel Machek
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20070827184829.GB4104@ucw.cz \
--to=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=jbms@cmu.edu \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=nigel@nigel.suspend2.net \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®