lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jun]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: [TuxOnIce-devel] [linux-pm] [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: Proposal for a new algorithm for reading & writing a hibernation image.
    Date
    On Monday 07 June 2010, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
    > Am Montag 07 Juni 2010 schrieb Nigel Cunningham:
    > > Hi.
    >
    > Hi Nigel and Rafael, hi everyone else involved,
    >
    > > On 07/06/10 05:04, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
    > > > On Sunday 06 June 2010, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
    > > >> On Sun, 2010-06-06 at 15:57 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
    > > >>> On Sunday 06 June 2010, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
    > > > ...
    > > >
    > > >>> So how TuxOnIce helps here?
    > > >>
    > > >> Very simple.
    > > >>
    > > >> With swsusp, I can save 750MB (memory) + 250 Vram (vram)
    > > >> With full memory save I can save (1750 MB of memory) + 250 MB of
    > > >> vram....
    > > >
    > > > So what about being able to save 1600 MB total instead of the 2 GB
    > > > (which is what we're talking about in case that's not clear)? Would
    > > > it be _that_ _much_ worse?
    > >
    > > That all depends on what is in the 400MB you discard.
    > >
    > > The difference is "Just as if you'd never hibernated" vs something
    > > closer to "Just as if you'd only just started up". We can't make
    > > categorical statements because it really does depend upon what you
    > > discard and what you want to do post-resume - that is, how useful the
    > > memory you discard would have been. That's always going to vary from
    > > case to case.
    >
    > Nigel and Rafael, how about just testing it?

    ISTR that can be done to some extent using TuxOnIce as is, becuase there is a
    knob that you can use to limit the image size.

    > Whats needed to have 80% of the memory saved instead of 50%?
    >
    > I think its important to go the next steps towards a better snapshot in
    > mainline kernel even when you do not agree on the complete end result yet.
    >
    > What about
    >
    > - Rafael, you review the async write patches of Nigel. If they are good,
    > IMHO they should go in as soon as possible.

    Yes, I'm going to do that.

    > - Nigel and/or Rafael, you look at whats needed to save 80% instead of 50%
    > of the memory and develop a patch for it

    That would be my suggestion as well.

    Thanks,
    Rafael


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2010-06-07 23:29    [W:0.022 / U:85.564 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site