Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Fri, 28 Feb 2003 20:48:31 +0530 | From | Suparna Bhattacharya <> | Subject | Re: Software Suspend Functionality in 2.5 |
| |
On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 02:44:06PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > > 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 ?
Regards Suparna
-- Suparna Bhattacharya (suparna@in.ibm.com) Linux Technology Center IBM Software Labs, India
- 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/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |