Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758504AbXJLDRx (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Oct 2007 23:17:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756611AbXJLDRd (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Oct 2007 23:17:33 -0400 Received: from mga03.intel.com ([143.182.124.21]:4663 "EHLO mga03.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758214AbXJLDRb (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Oct 2007 23:17:31 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.21,263,1188802800"; d="scan'208";a="297117904" Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2 -mm] kexec based hibernation -v5 From: "Huang, Ying" To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" , Pavel Machek , nigel@nigel.suspend2.net, Andrew Morton , Jeremy Maitin-Shepard , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, Kexec Mailing List In-Reply-To: <200710111217.58473.rjw@sisk.pl> References: <1192068833.27482.13.camel@caritas-dev.intel.com> <200710111217.58473.rjw@sisk.pl> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 11:19:32 +0800 Message-Id: <1192159172.17539.26.camel@caritas-dev.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.3 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Oct 2007 03:17:28.0867 (UTC) FILETIME=[6B7A9F30:01C80C7E] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1522 Lines: 46 On Thu, 2007-10-11 at 12:17 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thursday, 11 October 2007 04:13, Huang, Ying wrote: > > Kexec base hibernation has some potential advantages over uswsusp and > > TuxOnIce (suspend2). Some most obvious advantages are: > > Well, I have some doubts as far as the obviousness is concerned. OK, I will remove the "obvious". > > 1. The hibernation image size can exceed half of memory size easily. > > This is also possible with TuxOnIce. I will add detail description about this. It is possible with TuxOnIce, and hard with u/swsusp. > > > 2. The hibernation image can be written to and read from almost > > anywhere, such as USB disk, NFS. > > This is possible with uswsusp, at least in theory, probably with TuxOnIce too. I will remove this. > > 3. It is possible to eliminate freezer from kexec based hibernation > > implementation. > > This isn't true as long as we have not changed the handling of devices > (which is in the works, but will take time). I know it has not been implemented yet. I just say that it is possible for khibernation and it is almost impossible for u/swsusp and TuxOnIce. > > 4. Based on kexec/kdump implementation, the kernel code needed is > > less. > > Well, maybe. > Best Regards, Huang Ying - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/