From: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>
To: ck@vds.kolivas.org
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
Andreas Mohr <andi@rhlx01.fht-esslingen.de>,
Jun OKAJIMA <okajima@digitalinfra.co.jp>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ck] Re: Faster resuming of suspend technology.
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 21:35:59 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200603132136.00210.kernel@kolivas.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060313100619.GA2136@elf.ucw.cz>
On Monday 13 March 2006 21:06, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Ne 12-03-06 22:32:28, Andreas Mohr wrote:
> > And... well... this sounds to me exactly like a prime task
> > for the newish swap prefetch work, no need for any other
> > special solutions here, I think.
> > We probably want a new flag for swap prefetch to let it know
> > that we just resumed from software suspend and thus need
> > prefetching to happen *much* faster than under normal
> > conditions for a short while, though (most likely by
> > enabling prefetching on a *non-idle* system for a minute).
>
> Yep, that would be nice. We are actually able to save up-to half of
> pagecache, so situation is not as bad as it used to be.
I would be happy to extend swap prefetch's capabilities to improve resume. It
wouldn't be too hard to add a special post_resume_swap_prefetch() which
aggressively prefetches for a while. Excuse my ignorance, though, as I know
little about swsusp. Are there pages still on swap space after a resume
cycle?
Cheers,
Con
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-03-13 10:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 75+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-03-10 17:04 Faster resuming of suspend technology Jun OKAJIMA
2006-03-11 7:22 ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-03-11 12:17 ` Jun OKAJIMA
2006-03-11 12:46 ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-03-12 9:26 ` Jun OKAJIMA
2006-03-12 17:54 ` Jim Crilly
2006-03-12 23:06 ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-03-20 12:45 ` Jun OKAJIMA
2006-03-21 11:33 ` Fwd: " Jun OKAJIMA
2006-03-21 11:33 ` Jun OKAJIMA
2006-03-27 23:57 ` Jun OKAJIMA
2006-03-28 0:28 ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-03-28 0:28 ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-03-28 12:48 ` [Xen-devel] " Keir Fraser
2006-03-28 12:48 ` Keir Fraser
2006-03-12 21:32 ` Andreas Mohr
2006-03-12 22:30 ` [ck] " Con Kolivas
2006-03-13 1:43 ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-03-13 10:12 ` Pavel Machek
2006-03-13 11:10 ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-03-14 10:32 ` Pavel Machek
2006-03-13 10:06 ` Pavel Machek
2006-03-13 10:35 ` Con Kolivas [this message]
2006-03-13 10:43 ` [ck] " Pavel Machek
2006-03-13 11:13 ` Andreas Mohr
2006-03-13 11:36 ` does swsusp suck aftre resume for you? [was Re: [ck] Re: Faster resuming of suspend technology.] Pavel Machek
2006-03-13 12:03 ` does swsusp suck after resume for you? [was " Con Kolivas
2006-03-14 5:13 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-14 8:24 ` Andreas Mohr
2006-03-14 11:51 ` Pavel Machek
2006-03-14 12:33 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-14 12:43 ` Pavel Machek
2006-03-14 17:36 ` Lee Revell
2006-03-14 21:34 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-14 18:06 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-03-14 21:45 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-15 10:37 ` does swsusp suck aftre resume for you? [was " Stefan Seyfried
2006-03-15 17:59 ` Pavel Machek
2006-03-15 21:32 ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-03-16 10:33 ` does swsusp suck after resume for you? Con Kolivas
2006-03-16 10:46 ` Pavel Machek
2006-03-16 10:47 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-16 10:50 ` Pavel Machek
2006-03-16 21:33 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-16 21:44 ` Pavel Machek
2006-03-16 22:15 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-03-17 4:28 ` [PATCH] swsusp reclaim tweaks was: " Con Kolivas
2006-03-17 4:46 ` [ck] " Con Kolivas
2006-03-17 6:17 ` [PATCH] swsusp reclaim tweaks 2 Con Kolivas
2006-03-17 17:31 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-03-18 4:14 ` [PATCH][RFC] mm: swsusp shrink_all_memory tweaks Con Kolivas
2006-03-18 4:14 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-18 4:41 ` Nick Piggin
2006-03-18 4:41 ` Nick Piggin
2006-03-18 4:46 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-18 4:46 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-18 4:52 ` Nick Piggin
2006-03-18 4:52 ` Nick Piggin
2006-03-18 4:56 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-18 4:56 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-18 5:44 ` Nick Piggin
2006-03-18 5:44 ` Nick Piggin
2006-03-18 6:14 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-18 6:14 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-18 8:30 ` Nick Piggin
2006-03-18 8:30 ` Nick Piggin
2006-03-18 9:40 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-18 9:40 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-16 10:55 ` [ck] Re: does swsusp suck after resume for you? Andreas Mohr
2006-03-17 5:23 ` 2.6.16-rc6: swsusp cannot find swap partition Mark Lord
2006-03-17 5:34 ` Mark Lord
2006-03-16 11:31 ` [ck] Re: does swsusp suck after resume for you? Con Kolivas
2006-03-16 2:20 ` swsusp_suspend continues? Con Kolivas
2006-03-16 9:19 ` Pavel Machek
2006-03-16 16:12 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200603132136.00210.kernel@kolivas.org \
--to=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=andi@rhlx01.fht-esslingen.de \
--cc=ck@vds.kolivas.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=okajima@digitalinfra.co.jp \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.