| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
[Xen-devel] Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/3] xen: Use PM/Hibernate events for
On Mon, 21 Feb 2011, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-02-20 at 07:49 +0000, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > On Sat 2011-02-19 15:12:35, Shriram Rajagopalan wrote:
> > > The current implementation of xen guest save/restore/checkpoint
> > > functionality
> > > uses PM_SUSPEND and PM_RESUME events. This is not optimal when taking
> > > checkpoints of a virtual machine (where the suspend hypercall returns
> > > non-zero, requiring the devices and xenbus to just pickup from where they
> > > left
> > > off instead of a complete teardown/reconnect to backend).
> > >
> > > The following set of patches modify this implementation to use Hibernate
> > > style
> > > control flow (freeze/restore for save/restore and freeze/thaw for
> > > checkpoint,
> > > which is merely a cancelled save akin to failed swsusp() ).
> > >
> > > These patches are against Ian Campbell's PVHVM tree at
> > > git://xenbits.xen.org/people/ianc/linux-2.6.git for-stefano/pvhvm
> > >
> > > at commit 8a8d1bc753c4e2dda5f2890292d60c67d6ebb573
> > > kernel version: 2.6.38-rc4
> >
> > Series looks ok to me...
>
> Thanks Pavel, may we take that as an Acked-by?
>
> For my part the Xen side is:
> Acked-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>
There's one part of this which could be troublesome. The new code
generates FREEZE, THAW, and RESTORE events even in kernels where
CONFIG_HIBERNATION isn't set. In such kernels, drivers are not
obliged to handle these events correctly.
Shouldn't the CONFIG_XEN_SAVE_RESTORE option select CONFIG_HIBERNATION?
In which case the #ifdef lines in pm_op() wouldn't need to be changed.
Alan Stern
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home