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

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 21 Sep 2007 23:02:01 +0800
From:	"huang ying" <huang.ying.caritas@...il.com>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc:	linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	"Nigel Cunningham" <nigel@...el.suspend2.net>, nigel@...pend2.net,
	"Kexec Mailing List" <kexec@...ts.infradead.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>,
	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Jeremy Maitin-Shepard" <jbms@....edu>,
	"Len Brown" <lenb@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernation -v3: kexec jump

On 9/21/07, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl> wrote:
> On Friday, 21 September 2007 15:14, huang ying wrote:
> > On 9/21/07, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl> wrote:
> > > On Friday, 21 September 2007 05:33, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> > > > Nigel Cunningham <nigel@...el.suspend2.net> writes:
> [--snip--]
> > > >
> > > > No one has yet attacked the hard problem of coming up with separate
> > > > hibernate methods for drivers.
> > >
> > > Well, I've been playing a bit with that for some time, but it's not easy by any
> > > means.
> > >
> > > In short, I'm seeing some problems related to the handling of ACPI that seem to
> > > shatter the entire idea of having separate hibernate methods, at least as far
> > > as ACPI systems are concerned.
> >
> > So sadly to hear this. Can you details it a little? Or a link?
>
> Well, the problem is that apparently some systems (eg. my HP nx6325) expect us
> to execute the _PTS ACPI global control method before creating the image _and_
> to execute acpi_enter_sleep_state(ACPI_STATE_S4) in order to finally put the
> system into the sleep state.  In particular, on nx6325, if we don't do that,
> then after the restore the status of the AC power will not be reported
> correctly (and if you replace the battery while in the sleep state, the
> battery status will not be updated correctly after the restore).  Similar
> issues have been reported for other machines.
>
> Now, the ACPI specification requires us to put devices into low power states
> before executing _PTS and that's exactly what we're doing before a suspend to
> RAM.  Thus, it seems that in general we need to do the same for hibernation on
> ACPI systems.

Then, is it possible to separate device quiesce from device suspend.
Perhaps not for swsusp, but for kexec based hibernation?

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/