lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [May]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH 4/5] PM/Hibernate: Rework shrinking of memory
From
Date
Hi.

On Thu, 2009-05-07 at 22:00 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thursday 07 May 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Thursday 07 May 2009, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > > Hi.
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > > On Thu, 2009-05-07 at 00:44 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
> > > >
> > > > Rework swsusp_shrink_memory() so that it calls shrink_all_memory()
> > > > just once to make some room for the image and then allocates memory
> > > > to apply more pressure to the memory management subsystem, if
> > > > necessary.
> > > >
> > > > Unfortunately, we don't seem to be able to drop shrink_all_memory()
> > > > entirely just yet, because that would lead to huge performance
> > > > regressions in some test cases.
> > >
> > > I know it doesn't fit with your current way of doing things, but have
> > > you considered trying larger order allocations as a means of getting
> > > memory freed?
> >
> > Actually, I was thinking about that. What's your experience with this
> > approach?
> >
> > > I have code in tuxonice_prepare_image.c (look for extra_pages_allocated) that
> > > might be helpful for this purpose.
> >
> > OK, thanks. I'll have a look at it.
>
> I have tried it, but the results are even worse than with 0-order allocations
> only.
>
> So far, I have got the best results with shrink_all_memory() called once and
> followed by allocating as much memory as we want to be free using 0-order
> allocations. Like in this patch. :-)

Hmm. That's surprising. It would be interesting to look at what's going
on. Unfortunately, I just don't have the time at the moment to help.

Regards,

Nigel



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-05-07 22:55    [W:0.088 / U:113.072 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site