Hi. On Tuesday 21 February 2006 14:19, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Monday 20 February 2006 21:57, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > 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. > > 5MB/GB amounts to 0.5% overhead, I don't think you should be concerned > here. Much more important IMHO is that IIRC swsusp requires to be able to > free 1/2 of the physical memory whuch is hard on low memory boxes. Agreed. I'll look for related issues, and if there are none (or nothing serious), we can have one less difference between the two implementations. I may even be able to share the lowlevel code with Pavel then. That would be a good step forward. Regards, Nigel
Attachment:
pgpnMAUODIs4z.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- Follow-Ups:
- 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: Nigel Cunningham <[email protected]>
- Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- From: Dmitry Torokhov <[email protected]>
- [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.
- Prev by Date: Re: FMODE_EXEC or alike?
- Next by Date: Re: Request for export of truncate_complete_page
- 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):
 |