[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080516121328.GD22264@elf.ucw.cz>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 14:13:28 +0200
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>
To: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
Cc: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
nigel@...el.suspend2.net, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
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 Fri 2008-05-16 09:48:34, Huang, Ying wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-05-15 at 16:09 -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> [...]
> > Ok, You want to make BIOS calls. We already do that using vm86 mode and
> > use bios real mode interrupts. So why do we need this interface? Or, IOW,
> > how is this interface better?
>
> It can call code in 32-bit physical mode in addition to real mode. So It
> can be used to call EFI runtime service, especially call EFI 64 runtime
> service under 32-bit kernel or vice versa.
>
> The main purpose of kexec jump is for hibernation. But I think if the
> effort is small, why not support general 32-bit physical mode code call
> at same time.
I believe we should focus on kexecing kernels, first.
Only way to prove the effort is small is by having small followup
patch, and that needs the two patches separated...
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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