From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030624AbXD1BFt (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Apr 2007 21:05:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030727AbXD1BFr (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Apr 2007 21:05:47 -0400 Received: from gw.goop.org ([64.81.55.164]:37674 "EHLO mail.goop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030624AbXD1BFj (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Apr 2007 21:05:39 -0400 Message-ID: <46329DE3.6020307@goop.org> Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:05:39 -0700 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070302) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Matthew Garrett CC: Linus Torvalds , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Pekka J Enberg , Nigel Cunningham , LKML Subject: Re: Back to the future. References: <1177567481.5025.211.camel@nigel.suspend2.net> <1177654110.4737.91.camel@nigel.suspend2.net> <200704272324.43359.rjw@sisk.pl> <463292C8.9000307@goop.org> <20070428010043.GA21136@srcf.ucam.org> In-Reply-To: <20070428010043.GA21136@srcf.ucam.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Matthew Garrett wrote: > While that would certainly be nifty, I think we're arguably starting > from the wrong point here. Why are we booting a kernel, trying to poke > the hardware back into some sort of mock-quiescent state, freeing memory > and then (finally) overwriting the entire contents of RAM rather than > just doing all of this from the bootloader? Sure, you could make suspend generate a complete bootable kernel image containing all RAM. Doesn't sound too hard to me. You know, from over here on the sidelines. J