lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 10:26:28 +0800 From: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com> To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl> Cc: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>, "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, nigel@...el.suspend2.net, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org, Kexec Mailing List <kexec@...ts.infradead.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm] kexec jump -v9 On Tue, 2008-03-11 at 23:18 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Tuesday, 11 of March 2008, Vivek Goyal wrote: [...] > > Rafael/Pavel, does the approach of doing hibernation using a separate > > kernel holds promise? > > Well, what can I say? > > I haven't been a big fan of doing hibernation this way since the very beginning > and I still have the same reservations. Namely, my opinion is that the > hibernation-related problems we have are not just solvable this way. For one > example, in order to stop using the freezer for suspend/hibernation we first > need to revamp the suspending/resuming of devices (uder way) and the > kexec-based approach doesn't help us here. I wouldn't like to start another > discussion about it though. Yes. We need to work on device drivers for all hibernation implementations. And kexec-based hibernation provides a possible method to avoid freezer after driver works done. Best Regards, Huang Ying -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists