Hi. On Tuesday 21 February 2006 10:52, Andreas Happe wrote: [...] > I think that 'some people, like you' may be more than you think. > > I tried to use suspend2, but setup wasn't that great (i.e. didn't work > as well or easy as swsusp) so I dropped it. Could you provide more detail? If there's something I can do to make it easier to use, I'm more than willing to consider that. [...] > Encryption and compression for non-timecritical tasks: User or > kernelspace? The other stuff would be driver fixes (which would be > accepted) or infrastructure changes (rafael is at least interested in > bdev freezing, other stuff like using bitmaps seem totaly not acceptable > (and weren't for rather long.. but nigel didn't seem to mind)). I'm not sure I get what you're saying I didn't seem to mind. Your comment about using bitmaps made me do some math to see how much I'm saving by using them instead of Pavel's struct pbes. I don't think they were commented on as 'totally unacceptable', but as I look at them again now, I'm not so sure they're worth the effort. Will look again a little later in the day, particularly at the flow on effects of making such a change - perhaps I've forgotten something else). (For the record, my thinking went: swsusp uses n (12?) bytes of meta data for every page you save, where as using bitmaps makes that much closer to a constant value (a small variable amount for recording where the image will be stored in extents). 12 bytes per page is 3MB/1GB. If swsusp was to add support for multiple swap partitions or writing to files, those requirements might be closer to 5MB/GB. Bitmaps, in comparison, use ~32K/GB (approx because it depends whether the gigabyte is all in one zone). Proportionally, bitmaps are eating a lot less space out of your gigabyte, but I don't think anyone is going to notice that they have 3 or 4MB more cache per gigabyte with Suspend2 than they have with swsusp). Regards, Nigel
Attachment:
pgpk211kJHtoB.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- From: Andreas Happe <[email protected]>
- Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- From: Dmitry Torokhov <[email protected]>
- Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- References:
- [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.
- From: Nigel Cunningham <[email protected]>
- Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- From: Olivier Galibert <[email protected]>
- Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- From: Andreas Happe <[email protected]>
- [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] altix: export sn_pcidev_info_get
- Next by Date: Re: 2.6.16-rc4 bridge/iptables Oops
- Previous by thread: Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- Next by thread: Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- Index(es):