Hi,
I'm sure this had worked before. And since I don't do that on a regular basis,
but only by accident, I have no idea when it stopped working. But with my
2.6.28 kernel and everything more recent I don't get a warning if there is a
suspend image of a different kernel version, but simply the new kernel starts
and throws everything away. Is this a kernel fault or something with the
userspace stuff? Whom to blame for this?
Greetings,
Eike
On Sat 2009-03-14 16:28:59, Rolf Eike Beer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm sure this had worked before. And since I don't do that on a regular basis,
> but only by accident, I have no idea when it stopped working. But with my
> 2.6.28 kernel and everything more recent I don't get a warning if there is a
> suspend image of a different kernel version, but simply the new kernel starts
> and throws everything away. Is this a kernel fault or something with the
> userspace stuff? Whom to blame for this?
Actually, it should now be possible to resume with different kernel
than the one that did the suspendding...
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
On Monday 16 March 2009, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Sat 2009-03-14 16:28:59, Rolf Eike Beer wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm sure this had worked before. And since I don't do that on a regular basis,
> > but only by accident, I have no idea when it stopped working. But with my
> > 2.6.28 kernel and everything more recent I don't get a warning if there is a
> > suspend image of a different kernel version, but simply the new kernel starts
> > and throws everything away. Is this a kernel fault or something with the
> > userspace stuff? Whom to blame for this?
>
> Actually, it should now be possible to resume with different kernel
> than the one that did the suspendding...
As long as it is 64-bit.
Something broke if that doesn't work.
Rolf, is your kernel 64-bit?
Thanks,
Rafael
On Mon 2009-03-16 21:33:10, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday 16 March 2009, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > On Sat 2009-03-14 16:28:59, Rolf Eike Beer wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I'm sure this had worked before. And since I don't do that on a regular basis,
> > > but only by accident, I have no idea when it stopped working. But with my
> > > 2.6.28 kernel and everything more recent I don't get a warning if there is a
> > > suspend image of a different kernel version, but simply the new kernel starts
> > > and throws everything away. Is this a kernel fault or something with the
> > > userspace stuff? Whom to blame for this?
> >
> > Actually, it should now be possible to resume with different kernel
> > than the one that did the suspendding...
>
> As long as it is 64-bit.
>
> Something broke if that doesn't work.
>
> Rolf, is your kernel 64-bit?
And in 32-bit case, we should refuse to load the image. Something
broke if that does not work :-).
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
On Monday 16 March 2009, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Mon 2009-03-16 21:33:10, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday 16 March 2009, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > On Sat 2009-03-14 16:28:59, Rolf Eike Beer wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I'm sure this had worked before. And since I don't do that on a regular basis,
> > > > but only by accident, I have no idea when it stopped working. But with my
> > > > 2.6.28 kernel and everything more recent I don't get a warning if there is a
> > > > suspend image of a different kernel version, but simply the new kernel starts
> > > > and throws everything away. Is this a kernel fault or something with the
> > > > userspace stuff? Whom to blame for this?
> > >
> > > Actually, it should now be possible to resume with different kernel
> > > than the one that did the suspendding...
> >
> > As long as it is 64-bit.
> >
> > Something broke if that doesn't work.
> >
> > Rolf, is your kernel 64-bit?
>
> And in 32-bit case, we should refuse to load the image. Something
> broke if that does not work :-).
Well, the description suggests the boot kernel didn't load the image, but
just continued to boot. That really depends on what "throws everything away"
means in the original report. Rolf?
Rafael