Pavel Machek <[email protected]> writes: >> Ah, and now the part I really like, some hard numbers: >> swsusp takes between 26 and 30 seconds to suspend (in my four tries: 26, >> 30, 28, 26) and between 35 and 45 seconds to resume (35, 45, 39, 37). >> >> Suspend 2 does suspend in around 14-16 seconds, and resume in 18 to 21. >> >> That is factor 2! > > Does that include time to boot resume kernel? It will not be that > dramatic with that time included, and it is only fair to include > it. Anyway uswsusp solves that issue. On my old ThinkPad, the difference is more like a factor of 3 to 4 - from the moment I press the power button until X is up and running. Suspend2 resumes faster than Windows 2000 on this machine. -- Hilsen Harald. - 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/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Which is simpler?
- From: Pavel Machek <[email protected]>
- Re: Which is simpler?
- References:
- Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- From: Sebastian Kügler <[email protected]>
- Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- From: Matthias Hensler <[email protected]>
- Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- From: Pavel Machek <[email protected]>
- Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- From: Matthias Hensler <[email protected]>
- Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- From: Lee Revell <[email protected]>
- Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- From: Matthias Hensler <[email protected]>
- Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- From: Lee Revell <[email protected]>
- Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- From: Matthias Hensler <[email protected]>
- Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- From: Lee Revell <[email protected]>
- Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- From: Matthias Hensler <[email protected]>
- Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- From: Pavel Machek <[email protected]>
- Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- Prev by Date: Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- Next by Date: Re: [RFC][PATCH 04/20] pspace: Allow multiple instaces of the process id namespace
- Previous by thread: Re: agp fixes in suspend2 patch
- Next by thread: Re: Which is simpler?
- Index(es):
 |