linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Hibernation: Document __save_processor

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]

Message-ID: <20071230205104.GB26120@elte.hu>
Date:	Sun, 30 Dec 2007 21:51:04 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc:	pm list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Hibernation: Document __save_processor_state() on
	x86-64


* Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl> wrote:

> > But i'm wondering - are we really ever resuming to a different 
> > kernel version, for this to be an issue?
> 
> The boot kernel may be different from the kernel within the image, if 
> that's what you're asking for.

how different can it be, for resume to work? I mean, we'll have deeply 
kernel version dependent variables in RAM. Am i missing something 
obvious?

	Ingo
--
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/