[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m1lk2c4l4i.fsf@frodo.ebiederm.org>
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 14:43:41 -0700
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
Cc: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
nigel@...el.suspend2.net, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Kexec Mailing List <kexec@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kexec based hibernation: a prototype of kexec multi-stage load
"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com> writes:
>> So, IMHO, for first simple implementation, we don't have to pass around
>> any data between kernels except entry point. (Please correct me if I am
>> wrong). Lets get that implementation in first and then we can get rest
>> of the pieces in place.
>
> Yes. Kernel entry/re-entry point is the only information need to be
> communicated between kernels for just switching between them. So we can
> focus on kexec jump patch firstly.
Then as a preliminary design let's plan on this.
- Pass the rentry point as the return address (using the C ABI).
We may want to load the stack pointer etc so we can act as
a direct entry point for new code.
- Look at passing a pointer to the mapping of pages that the kexec
trampoline uses in arg1 of the C ABI. Largely the format is defacto
fixed anyway because we need to pass the structure from C to
assembly.
Using the standard C ABI makes things much it much easier to pick
a calling convention, and to document it.
Eric
--
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