On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 10:24:20PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > > if suspend-to-disk is fast enough, you could just *always* write > > to disk, even if we're doing S3. If power runs out, you then have a > > valid resume image on-disk. iirc, this is what Windows does. > > Yep, I call that suspend-to-both. It is planned, but not really > trivial, and I'm a little busy. If someone wants to help.... I was thinking a few days ago. With your move of all this stuff to userspace, if it was done in multiple stages, we could implement a form of checkpointing this way. So instead of doing the 'suspend to disk/ram' after 'write out all pages', we just continue. Why is this useful ? We've seen bugs reported that only ever bite customers after they've run their workload for a month. Now, if they had a means of checkpointing, then when it crashes, they could capture the last image that landed somewhere, and set that up for more tests/monitoring with kprobes etc and reproduce those hard-to-reproduce bugs a lot faster. Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
