On Friday, 13 July 2007 07:42, Joseph Fannin wrote: > On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 08:06:43PM -0700, david@xxxxxxx wrote: > > On Thu, 12 Jul 2007, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > Plus we need to figure out how to avoid corrupting filesystems and > > > swap in use by the "old" kernel and its processes (hint: a separate > > > "hibernation partition" is a no-go). > > > > I thought the existing hibernation wrote to the swap partition as it's > > dedicated space? > > > > I didn't know that anyone was suggesting writing the hibernation image to > > a filesystem that the kernel was activly accessing. > > I'm suggesting a dedicated, preallocated hibernation *file*, right > now. There's no way around it, if hibernation is to be reliable -- > otherwise hibernation can fail if the system has used enough of its > swap space, so that there isn't enough room to write the hibernate > image. > > Even if it's desirable to allow hibernation to fail if the system is > too deep into swap, it's a moot point. If you're afraid of that, use a dedicated swap file. Greetings, Rafael -- "Premature optimization is the root of all evil." - Donald Knuth _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
