lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Mar]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: Dealing with swsusp vs. pmdisk
Date
>>>>> "Pavel" == Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> writes:
[...]
Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>:
>> Pavel, what do you think of the swsusp2 patch, BTW? My biggest
>> complaint about it is that since it's maintained outside of the
>> kernel, it's constantly behind about 0.75 revisions behind the
>> latest 2.6 release. The feature set of swsusp2, if they can ever
>> get it completely bugfree(tm) is certainly impressive.

Pavel> My biggest problem with swsusp2 is that it is big. Also last
Pavel> time I looked it had some ugly hooks sprinkled all over the
Pavel> kernel. Then there are some features I don't like (graphical
Pavel> screens with progress, escape-to-abort) and
Pavel> ithasvariableslikethis. OTOH it supports highmem and smp.

It also has the advantage of working extremely reliably on 2.4 (and a
large part of the code base is shared, so that's a significant data
point). I couldn't get it to crash or do anything bad for months now,
and I'm doing at least several suspend/resumes a day on my laptop.

Also, thanks to the excellent compression feature, suspend/resume times
are very short and in fact competitive with suspend-to-ram schemes.

I think it's better not to mix personal preferences (such as the
escape-to-abort thing) with technical discussions. On a practical level,
swsusp2 is the only implementation which works reliably, does its job
very well, and has a responsive maintainer willing to fix problems as
they arise.

--J.
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:01    [W:0.167 / U:0.132 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site