linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2 -mm] kexec based hibernation -v5

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, 19 Oct 2007 18:53:55 -0700 (PDT)
From:	david@...g.hm
To:	Phillip Susi <psusi@....rr.com>
cc:	"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, nigel@...el.suspend2.net,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Jeremy Maitin-Shepard <jbms@....edu>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	Kexec Mailing List <kexec@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2 -mm] kexec based hibernation -v5

On Fri, 19 Oct 2007, Phillip Susi wrote:

> Huang, Ying wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> The restore process with the patch set is as follow:
>> 
>> 1. Boot a kernel C (crash dump enabled), the memory area used by
>>    kernel C must be a subset of memory area used by kernel B.
>
> Why is a third kernel needed?  Why can't kernel B be used for this as well? 
> In fact, if kernel A has been compiled to be relocatable and crash dump 
> enabled, why wouldn't it suffice for all 3 instances?

you could use one kernel for all three, or you could use three different 
kernels, and three different sets of userspace if it's appropriate.

David Lang
-
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/