Re: Back to the future.

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/