[lkml]   [2006]   [Mar]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: does swsusp suck after resume for you?
    > > > > The tunable in /proc/sys/vm/swap_prefetch is now bitwise ORed:
    > > > > Thus if you set this value
    > > > > to 3 it will prefetch aggressively and then drop back to the default
    > > > > of 1. This makes it easy to simply set the aggressive flag once and
    > > > > forget about it. I've booted and tested this feature and it's working
    > > > > nicely. Where exactly you'd set this in your resume scripts I'm not
    > > > > sure. A rolled up patch against 2.6.16-rc6-mm1 is here for
    > > > > simplicity:

    correct url:

    > > 2 means aggressively prefetch as much as possible and then disable swap
    > > prefetching from that point on. Too confusing?
    > Ahha... oops, yes, clever; no, I guess keep it.

    Ok the patch works fine for me and the feature is worthwhile in absolute terms
    as well as for improving resume.

    Pavel, while we're talking about improving behaviour after resume I had a look
    at the mechanism used to free up ram before suspending and I can see scope
    for some changes in the vm code that would improve the behaviour after
    resuming. Is the mechanism used to free up ram going to continue being used
    with uswsusp? If so, I'd like to have a go at improving the free up ram vm
    code to make it behave nicer after resume. I have some ideas about how best
    to free up ram differently from normal reclaim which would improve behaviour
    post resume.

    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: 2006-03-16 22:35    [W:0.028 / U:1.232 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site