Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 28 Feb 2003 16:17:45 +0100 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: Software Suspend Functionality in 2.5 |
| |
Hi!
> > > Atomic snapshots are what we'd like for dump too, since we desire > > > accurate dumps (minimum drift), so its not a conflicting requirement. > > > The difference is that while you could do i/o (e.g to flush pages > > > to free up memory) before initiating an atomic snapshot, we can't. > > > > OTOH "best-effort-atomic" is probably okay for you, while it is not > > acceptable for swsusp. Hopefully the code is not going to get too > > complicated by "must be atomic" and "must work with crashed system" > > requirements... > > > For the kind of atomicity you need there probably are two > steps: > 1) Quiesce the system - get to a point of consistency (when you > can take a resumable snapshot) > 2) Perform an atomic copy / snapshot > > Step (1) would be different for swsusp and crash dump (not > intended to be common ). But for Step (2), do you think > what you need/do is complicated by crashed system requirements ?
Well, I guess count_and_copy_data_pages() is easy to share, OTOH it is really small piece of code. Also do you think you can free half of memory in crashed system? Thats what swsusp currently does...
[I need really little about LKCD... But you are going to need modified disk drivers etc, right? I'd like to get away without that in swsusp, at least in 2.6.X.]
Pavel -- Horseback riding is like software... ...vgf orggre jura vgf serr. - 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/
| |