lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Feb]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
    Date
    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
    [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2006-02-21 04:06    [W:4.213 / U:0.008 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site