On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 11:30:50AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> 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.
I don't understand what you mean. A dedicated swap file for what?
--
Joseph Fannin
jfannin@xxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
linux-pm mailing list
linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
