Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 21 Feb 2006 13:27:28 +0100 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.) |
| |
On Út 21-02-06 15:51:08, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > 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.
Yep, that would be very nice. Pavel -- Web maintainer for suspend.sf.net (www.sf.net/projects/suspend) wanted... - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |