Re: Back to the future.
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge
Date: Fri Apr 27 2007 - 21:06:10 EST
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.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/