Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernation -v3: kexec jump

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...>
Cc: Jeremy Maitin-Shepard <jbms@...>, Alan Stern <stern@...>, Nigel Cunningham <nigel@...>, <nigel@...>, Kexec Mailing List <kexec@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...>, Huang, Ying <ying.huang@...>, <linux-pm@...>, huang ying <huang.ying.caritas@...>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...>
Date: Saturday, September 22, 2007 - 2:00 pm

On Sep 22, 2007, at 06:34:17, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:

First of all, we will need to make the resumed kernel throw away  
*ALL* of its ACPI state on S5 and completely reinitialize ACPI as  
though it was booting for the first time on resume.  From what I can  
tell, we "throw away" all the ACPI state in the boot kernel and  
reinitialize it there, but then the reinitialized state is  
overwritten with the resumed kernel's state and the two don't always  
happen to be the same.  (Like if a battery got replaced or AC status  
changed).

Umm, I don't see how that can possibly work properly.  For a laptop,  
for example, the restore kernel will need to access the disk, the LCD  
display, and possibly the AC/battery and current CPU frequency.  From  
what I understand of ACPI, both of the former may need ACPI code to  
operate properly (Isn't there an ATA taskfile object of some kind?)  
and the latter two almost definitely need ACPI.  Ergo the boot kernel  
may need to initialize and use ACPI just to run an ATA taskfile so it  
can read from the HDD efficiently.


That's not what he was talking about.  The problem discussed was:
   (A) You hibernate your box, entering S5 (IE: power off)
   (B) You resume the box and the boot kernel inits all the ACPI stuff.
   (C) The boot kernel's ACPI state is completely replaced by the  
resumed kernel's state.
   (D) Hardware stops working mysteriously because of ACPI problems.

The only possible conclusion is that the state between the boot  
kernel and the resume kernel was *different* and so the device failed  
because the ACPI state in the resume kernel doesn't match the actual  
state of the hardware.

Cheers,
Kyle Moffett
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernation -v3: kexec ..., Eric W. Biederman, (Fri Sep 21, 12:01 am)
Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernation -v3: kexec ..., Eric W. Biederman, (Thu Sep 20, 10:55 pm)
Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernat..., Rafael J. Wysocki, (Fri Sep 21, 8:10 am)
Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernation -v3: kexec ..., Rafael J. Wysocki, (Fri Sep 21, 7:56 am)
Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernation -v3: kexec ..., Rafael J. Wysocki, (Fri Sep 21, 8:18 am)
Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernation -v3: kexec ..., Eric W. Biederman, (Thu Sep 20, 11:33 pm)
Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernat..., Rafael J. Wysocki, (Fri Sep 21, 8:09 am)
Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernat..., Rafael J. Wysocki, (Fri Sep 21, 10:31 am)
Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernat..., Jeremy Maitin-Shepard, (Fri Sep 21, 2:11 pm)
Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernat..., Rafael J. Wysocki, (Fri Sep 21, 3:00 pm)
Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernat..., Rafael J. Wysocki, (Fri Sep 21, 4:15 pm)
Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernat..., Jeremy Maitin-Shepard, (Fri Sep 21, 4:26 pm)
Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernat..., Rafael J. Wysocki, (Fri Sep 21, 4:53 pm)
Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernat..., Jeremy Maitin-Shepard, (Fri Sep 21, 5:08 pm)
Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernat..., Rafael J. Wysocki, (Fri Sep 21, 5:25 pm)
Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernat..., Jeremy Maitin-Shepard, (Fri Sep 21, 5:16 pm)
Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernat..., Rafael J. Wysocki, (Sat Sep 22, 6:34 am)
Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernat..., Kyle Moffett, (Sat Sep 22, 2:00 pm)
Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernat..., Rafael J. Wysocki, (Sat Sep 22, 5:51 pm)
Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernat..., Rafael J. Wysocki, (Sat Sep 22, 6:40 am)
Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernat..., Rafael J. Wysocki, (Wed Oct 24, 4:38 pm)
Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernat..., Rafael J. Wysocki, (Fri Sep 21, 11:50 am)
Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernation -v3: kexec ..., Nigel Cunningham, (Thu Sep 20, 10:25 pm)
Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernation -v3: kexec ..., Nigel Cunningham, (Thu Sep 20, 10:58 pm)
Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernation -v3: kexec ..., Eric W. Biederman, (Fri Sep 21, 12:46 am)