Hi. On Thursday 19 July 2007 11:04:20 Andrew Morton wrote: > On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 15:13:13 +0800 > "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > The changelog between v1 and v2 > > > > 1. The kexec jump implementation is put into the kexec/kdump > > framework instead of software suspend framework. The device > > and CPU state save/restore code of software suspend is called > > when needed. > > > > 2. The same code path is used for both kexec a new kernel and jump > > back to original kernel. > > I like the idea but I think I'll let people chat about it a bit more > before looking at merging the patches, OK? Please wait until you see a complete implementation that actually works. I'm sitting here quietly, following (and now breaking) the "If you can't say anything positive, don't say anything at all" line because I think that the more into the implementation details people get, the uglier this is going to show itself to be. I'm perfectly willing to be proven wrong, but haven't seen anything so far that's even begun to convince me otherwise. Regards, Nigel -- See http://www.tuxonice.net for Howtos, FAQs, mailing lists, wiki and bugzilla info.
Attachment:
pgpGRIVIadBVV.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
