Hi,
On Thursday 23 March 2006 23:48, Mark Lord wrote:
> Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >
> > I agree it probably may be improved. Still it seems to be good enough. Further,
> > it's more efficient than the previous solution, so I consider it as an improvement.
> > Also this code has been tested for quite some time in -mm and appears to
> > behave properly, at least we haven't got any bug reports related to it so far.
>
> I find the in-kernel swsusp to be quite slow, and it seems to use
> an awful lot of memory for book-keeping. So count that as encouragement
> to improve the performance when you can.
This particular patch actually decreases the amount of memory used by swsusp.
Moreover I have _nothing_ against improvements, but it requires some time to
improve things.
> > Currently I'm not working on any better solution. If you can provide any
> > patches to implement one, please submit them, but I think they'll have to be
> > tested for as long as this code, in -mm.
>
> It would be *really nice* if you guys could stop being so underhandedly
> nasty in every single reply to anything from Nigel.
Well, you know, it's generally easy to say that something's done in a wrong
way, but this alone doesn't help _anyone_.
Suggestions are nice, but _someone_ has to implement them and I think
Nigel is more than capable of doing it in this particular case. Also the code
in question is quite sensitive and such that it should be tested for a longer
time IMO.
That's what I was trying to say and it was not my intention to be nasty at all.
Greetings,
Rafael
-
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
