David Woodhouse <dwmw2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Mon, 2024-12-16 at 14:39 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> The KEXEC_JUMP flow is analogous to hibernation flows occurring >> before >> and after creating an image and before and after jumping from the >> restore kernel to the image one, which is why it uses the same device >> callbacks as those hibernation flows. >> >> Add comments explaining that to the code in question and update an >> existing comment in it which appears a bit out of context. >> >> No functional changes. >> >> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> > > Thanks. I'll round that up into my kexec-debug tree, which Ingo has > been taking into tip/x86/boot. Once I'm done fighting with > objtool(qv). I have no objection to getting kexec jump more in sync with the rest of the power management code. I do have a question though. Does anyone actually use kexec jump? It is fine if folks do, but I haven't actually heard of anyone using it. If folks aren't using it, it might make sense to just use the fact that it is broken as a nudge to remove that option. Eric
