Hi! > >> > Does this make sense? > >> > >> Yes, this is a sensible optimization. But I think it may be better to > >> make bootloader load kernel D directly into a specified memory location. > >> For example, we can add a option to "kernel" command of grub. > >> > >> And, I think we can do more in bootloader. Such as we can prepare > >> two > > > > Yes, that would be nice. > > > > It will mean quite a bit of work, but I guess it should be the long > > term goal. Loading restore kernel directly from bootloader means: > > > > 1) it is fast -- no need to boot another kernel > > > > 2) it is "classical" way of doing things > > > > On the other hand, we loose flexibility that way: > > > > 1) it locks you onto one bootloader > > > > 2) you no longer have userland there to do uncompression, decryption, > > etc.. > > True although for the uncompression and decryption those aren't exactly foreign > requirements for bootloaders. Well, uncompression yes, but crypto? What is that, some kind of trusted computing thingie? We do RSA for uswsusp, that may be a bit of problem for a bootloader, but I'm glad bootloaders are bloated already :-). -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
