On Sun, Dec 09, 2007 at 10:46:35PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Sunday, 9 of December 2007, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 09, 2007 at 03:27:57PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > ...
> >
> > > > Instead, I'd rather issue a warning that the swsusp header mismatches,
> > > > say with
> > > > which kernel the machine got suspended with and then start the
> > > > countdown for reboot.
> > >
> > > What exactly would that change? You need to reboot anyway and fsck will
> > > run on
> > > the filesystems regardless of which kernel you boot with.
> >
> > well, you'll have the chance to reboot with the kernel the machine got
> > suspended
> > with and then the swsusp image header _will_ match so no fsck-ing. or am i
> > missing something...
>
> Yes, you are. :-)
>
> With the new code (which BTW I'm assuming we are talking about) the images are
> not matched against the kernel they were created by, but against a hard-coded
> magic number (defined in suspend_64.c) playing the role of the "header
> protocol
> version" and against some system parameters, like the amount of RAM etc.
> Since all kernels containing the new code use the same magic number, all of
> them will match or none of them will match.
right, i was kinda wondering when actually a swsusp image won't match after
looking
at check_image_kernel() but missed that arch-specific RESTORE_MAGIC bit.
Thanks for clearing that up.
--
Regards/Gruß,
Boris.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
