[lkml]   [2006]   [Feb]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)

    On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 11:56:17AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
    > On Po 20-02-06 10:47:28, Matthias Hensler wrote:
    > > I do not think that Suspend 2 needs 14000 lines for that, the core
    > > is much smaller. But besides, _not_ saving the pagecache is a really
    > > _bad_ idea. I expect to have my system back after resume, in the
    > > same state I had left it prior to suspend. I really do not like it
    > > how it is done by Windows, it is just ugly to have a slowly
    > > responding system after resume, because all caches and buffers are
    > > gone.
    > That's okay, swsusp already saves configurable ammount of pagecache.

    What about uswsusp?

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2006-02-20 12:21    [W:0.020 / U:6.156 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site