Re: 2.6.9-rc2-mm1 swsusp bug report.

From: Nigel Cunningham
Date: Sun Sep 26 2004 - 17:02:15 EST


Hi.

On Sun, 2004-09-26 at 20:04, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Are we still planning on having suspend2 replace swsusp eventually? It
> > was a lot of work to switch from those high order allocations, and if we
> > are still going to replace swsusp, perhaps it's would be a better use of
> > your time to do other things?
>
> I do not know if I'm more scared of swsusp1 to kill order-8
> allocations or if suspend2's two page sets scare me more. (Hooks
> suspend2 needs to stop all page cache activity are scary...)

Hooks to stop all page cache activity? I'm not sure what you mean.

> I certainly want some parts of suspend2 (like improved freezer, if it
> can be made small enough), but I'm no longer sure I want all of it. I
> expected many people complaining about highmem problems in swsusp1,
> and that just did not happen; SMP support turned out to be reasonably
> simple...

Okay. There are other advantages too, of course :>

Nigel

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/