lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Mar]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/20] x86_64 Relocatable bzImage support (V4)
    On Thu, Mar 08, 2007 at 07:07:23PM +1100, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
    > Hi.
    >
    > On Thu, 2007-03-08 at 10:10 +0530, Vivek Goyal wrote:
    > > On Thu, Mar 08, 2007 at 10:15:02AM +1100, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
    > > > Hi.
    > > >
    > > > On Thu, 2007-03-08 at 07:49 +1100, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
    > > > > Hi.
    > > > >
    > > > > On Wed, 2007-03-07 at 07:07 -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
    > > > > > On Wed, 2007-03-07 at 12:27 +0530, Vivek Goyal wrote:
    > > > > > > Hi,
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > Here is another attempt on x86_64 relocatable bzImage patches(V4). This
    > > > > > > patchset makes a bzImage relocatable and same kernel binary can be loaded
    > > > > > > and run from different physical addresses.
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > > have these patches been extensively tested with various suspend
    > > > > > scenarios? (S1,S3,S4 in acpi speak or s2ram and s2disk in Linux speak)
    > > > >
    > > > > We did work on this for RHEL5, getting relocatable kernel support
    > > > > working fine with S4. While doing it and since, I've been running
    > > > > Suspend2 with the same patch.
    > > > >
    > > > > Since that work, Vivek has done more modifications, but I can confirm
    > > > > that the basic design is reliable with S4. Haven't tried S3, but can do.
    > > > > Will report back shortly.
    > > >
    > > > S3 works okay here with a relocatable x86_64 kernel (2.6.20).
    > > >
    > >
    > > Hi Nigel,
    > >
    > > Is it possible to test S3 with 2.6.21-rc2 kernels also. Right now I don't
    > > have access to any machine supporting S3. I tested it at the time of my last
    > > posting and it had worked well. Appreciate your help.
    >
    > Tested with rc3 (rc2 wouldn't compile), and it works fine.
    >

    Thanks a lot Nigel.

    > If you're willing, please add
    >
    > Signed-off-by: Nigel Cunningham <ncunning@redhat.com>
    >
    > or
    >
    > Acked-by: Nigel Cunningham <ncunning@redhat.com>
    >
    > to the hibernation related parts as you see appropriate, since I helped
    > (albeit in a minor way compared to your work and Eric's work) with
    > preparing and testing them for RHEL5 and have confirmed they're still ok
    > in this version.

    Sure. You have helped a lot. I think either Andi or Andrew needs to
    add "Acked-by:" string while adding the hibernation related patches
    (Assuming they decide do pick up the patches.)

    Thanks
    Vivek
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2007-03-08 09:33    [W:0.024 / U:13.008 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site