Re: [PATCH 3/4 -mm] kexec based hibernation -v7 : kexec hibernate/resume

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: huang ying
Date: Friday, December 7, 2007 - 6:28 am

On Dec 7, 2007 8:52 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:

Two blocking notifier chain named kjump_chain_pre and kjump_chain_post
are defined, the basic procedure of kexec jump is as follow:

call functions in kjump_chain_pre
jump to peer kernel
call functions in kjump_chain_post

A command is the first parameter of functions in chain. If A command
is processed in a function, the function will execute and stop the
chain (return NOTIFY_STOP), otherwise it will do nothing (return
NOTIFY_DONE). If no function has interest in the command, the default
behavior will be executed (kexec_vcall_pre, kexec_vcall_post).

So for each command the procedure is as follow:

KJUMP_CMD_HIBERNATE_WRITE_IMAGE:
[chain] kexec_snapshot
jump to kexeced kernel
[chain] kexec_prepare_write_image /* in kexeced kernel */

KJUMP_HIBERNATE_RESUME:
[chain] kexec_prepare_resume /* in kexeced kernel */
jump to kexec kernel
[chain] kexec_resume


Yes, there are too many duplicated code. They should be merged. But I
want to delay the merging until the kexec based hibernation code goes
more stable.


Now the kexec_lock is used as a mutex between kexec related
operations. It seems reasonable to use pm_mutex and maybe
snapshot_device_available to eliminate potential conflict between
kexec based hibernation and u/swsusp.

Best Regards,
Huang Ying
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [PATCH 3/4 -mm] kexec based hibernation -v7 : kexec hi ..., huang ying, (Fri Dec 7, 6:28 am)