Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:05:39 -0700 | From | Jeremy Fitzhardinge <> | Subject | Re: Back to the future. |
| |
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 - 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) |