Hi.
On Wednesday 26 April 2006 07:12, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tuesday 25 April 2006 22:32, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > > -unsigned int count_data_pages(void)
> > > > >
> > > > > +/**
> > > > > + * need_to_copy - determine if a page needs to be copied before
> > > > > saving. + * Returns false if the page can be saved without copying.
> > > > > + */
> > > > > +
> > > > > +static int need_to_copy(struct page *page)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > + if (!PageLRU(page) || PageCompound(page))
> > > > > + return 1;
> > > > > + if (page_mapped(page))
> > > > > + return page_mapped_by_current(page);
> > > > > +
> > > > > + return 1;
> > > > > +}
> > > >
> > > > I'd much rather VM internal type stuff get moved *out* of
> > > > kernel/power :(
> > >
> > > Well, I kind of agree, but I don't know where to place it under mm/.
> > >
> > > > It needs more comments too. Also, how important is it for the page to
> > > > be off the LRU?
> > >
> > > Hm, I'm not sure if that's what you're asking about, but the pages off
> > > the LRU are handled in a usual way, ie. copied when snapshotting the
> > > system. The pages _on_ the LRU may be included in the snapshot image
> > > without copying, but I require them additionally to be (a) mapped by
> > > someone and (b) not mapped by the current task.
> >
> > Why do you _want_ them mapped by someone?
>
> Because this means they belong to a task that is frozen and won't touch
> them (of course unless it's us). The kernel has no reason to access them
> either (even after we resume devices) except for reclaiming, but that's
> handled explicitly. Thus it's safe to include them in the image without
> copying.
>
> As I said before, I think the page cache pages may be treated this way too.
> It probably applies to all of the LRU pages, but there may be some corner
> cases. The mapped pages are just easy to single out.
It does apply to all of the LRU pages. This is what I've been doing for years
now. The only corner case I've come across is XFS. It still wants to write
data even when there's nothing to do and it's threads are frozen (IIRC -
haven't looked at it for a while). I got around that by freezing bdevs when
freezing processes.
Regards,
Nigel
--
See our web page for Howtos, FAQs, the Wiki and mailing list info.
http://www.suspend2.net IRC: #suspend2 on Freenode
Attachment:
pgpXrP2ixZOpT.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [RFC][PATCH] swsusp: support creating bigger images
- From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC][PATCH] swsusp: support creating bigger images
- References:
- [RFC][PATCH] swsusp: support creating bigger images
- From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC][PATCH] swsusp: support creating bigger images
- From: Pavel Machek <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC][PATCH] swsusp: support creating bigger images
- From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[email protected]>
- [RFC][PATCH] swsusp: support creating bigger images
- Prev by Date: Re: Compiling C++ modules
- Next by Date: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/11] security: AppArmor - Overview
- Previous by thread: Re: [RFC][PATCH] swsusp: support creating bigger images
- Next by thread: Re: [RFC][PATCH] swsusp: support creating bigger images
- Index(es):
 |