Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH -mm] kexec jump -v9

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...>
Cc: Alan Stern <stern@...>, Pavel Machek <pavel@...>, <nigel@...>, Kexec Mailing List <kexec@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...>, <linux-pm@...>, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...>, Len Brown <len.brown@...>
Date: Thursday, May 15, 2008 - 5:20 pm

On Thursday, 15 of May 2008, Eric W. Biederman wrote:

Well, you don't remove the power from devices doing that, do you?

I was referring to the fact that you remove the power from devices after saving
the image (ie. in the "poweroff" stage).  Then, you initialize them and pass
all that to the restored kernel and the question here is:
(a) Should they be reinitialized before the restored kernel has a chance to
    access them?
(b) If they should, what state they ought to be in when the restored kernel
    accesses them.

That basically depends on how you're going to handle the resuming of devices,
especially on the ACPI bus, in the restored kernel.

If we are to follow ACPI, the answer to (a) is "no", except for devices used to
read the image and it's better if the boot kernel doesn't touch ACPI at all.
Then, the benefit of putting the system into S4 during the "poweroff" stage is
that (a) the resume can be carried out faster and (b) the restored kernel may
use some context preserved by the platform over the sleep state.

Also, that allows you to use the wake up capabilities of some devices that
need not be available from S5.

In any case, however, I don't really think that doing the kexec jump before
creating the image is really necessary.  The kexec jump during resume is in
fact very similar to what the current hibernation code does, but it's slightly
more complicated. :-)

Thanks,
Rafael
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH -mm] kexec jump -v9, Pavel Machek, (Thu Mar 20, 6:40 am)
Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH -mm] kexec jump -v9, Rafael J. Wysocki, (Thu Mar 20, 6:45 pm)
Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH -mm] kexec jump -v9, Alan Stern, (Thu Mar 20, 7:01 pm)
Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH -mm] kexec jump -v9, Pavel Machek, (Thu Mar 20, 7:22 pm)
Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH -mm] kexec jump -v9, Rafael J. Wysocki, (Thu Mar 20, 7:40 pm)
Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH -mm] kexec jump -v9, Alan Stern, (Thu Mar 20, 8:52 pm)
Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH -mm] kexec jump -v9, Pavel Machek, (Sat Mar 22, 12:21 pm)
Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH -mm] kexec jump -v9, Rafael J. Wysocki, (Sat Mar 22, 1:45 pm)
Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH -mm] kexec jump -v9, Alan Stern, (Sat Mar 22, 4:49 pm)
Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH -mm] kexec jump -v9, Rafael J. Wysocki, (Sat Mar 22, 5:29 pm)
Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH -mm] kexec jump -v9, Eric W. Biederman, (Wed May 14, 6:38 pm)
Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH -mm] kexec jump -v9, Rafael J. Wysocki, (Wed May 14, 7:47 pm)
Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH -mm] kexec jump -v9, Eric W. Biederman, (Thu May 15, 4:55 pm)
Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH -mm] kexec jump -v9, Rafael J. Wysocki, (Thu May 15, 5:20 pm)
Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH -mm] kexec jump -v9, Nigel Cunningham, (Fri Mar 21, 6:05 pm)
Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH -mm] kexec jump -v9, Rafael J. Wysocki, (Thu Mar 20, 8:36 pm)