From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756960AbZEHXoK (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 May 2009 19:44:10 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753118AbZEHXn4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 May 2009 19:43:56 -0400 Received: from ogre.sisk.pl ([217.79.144.158]:47918 "EHLO ogre.sisk.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753109AbZEHXnz (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 May 2009 19:43:55 -0400 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: nigel@tuxonice.net Subject: Re: [TuxOnIce-devel] [RFC] TuxOnIce Date: Sat, 9 May 2009 01:43:10 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.11.2 (Linux/2.6.30-rc4-rjw; KDE/4.2.2; x86_64; ; ) Cc: Pavel Machek , linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, tuxonice-devel@lists.tuxonice.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <1241620755-22133-1-git-send-email-nigel@tuxonice.net> <200905090046.21282.rjw@sisk.pl> <1241825408.19600.384.camel@nigel-laptop> In-Reply-To: <1241825408.19600.384.camel@nigel-laptop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200905090143.10980.rjw@sisk.pl> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Saturday 09 May 2009, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > Hi. > > On Sat, 2009-05-09 at 00:46 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Friday 08 May 2009, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > > On Fri, 2009-05-08 at 16:11 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > On Friday 08 May 2009, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 2009-05-07 at 23:51 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > > > > On Thu 2009-05-07 19:42:54, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > > > > On Thursday 07 May 2009, Pavel Machek wrote: [--snip--] > > > And the code includes some fundamental differences. I freeze processes > > > and prepare the whole image before saving anything or doing an atomic > > > copy whereas you just free memory before doing the atomic copy. You save > > > everything in one part whereas I save the image in two parts. > > > > IMO the differences are not that fundamental. The whole problem boils down > > to using the same data structures for memory management and I think we can > > reach an agreement here. > > I think we might be able to agree on using the same data structures, but > I'm not so sure about algorithms - I think you're underestimating the > differences here. Well, which algorithms do you have in mind in particular? Rafael