Messages in this thread | | | From | "Rafael J. Wysocki" <> | Subject | Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.) | Date | Tue, 21 Feb 2006 21:40:56 +0100 |
| |
On Tuesday 21 February 2006 05:19, 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.
I see another point in using bitmaps: we could avoid modifying page flags and use bitmaps to store all of the temporary information. I thought about it for some time and I think it's doable.
Greetings, Rafael - 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/
| |