From: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
Cc: ck@vds.kolivas.org, Stefan Seyfried <seife@suse.de>,
Jun OKAJIMA <okajima@digitalinfra.co.jp>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andreas Mohr <andi@rhlx01.fht-esslingen.de>
Subject: Re: does swsusp suck after resume for you?
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 21:47:56 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200603162147.56725.kernel@kolivas.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060316104630.GA9399@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>
On Thursday 16 March 2006 21:46, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > On Thursday 16 March 2006 04:59, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > The tunable in /proc/sys/vm/swap_prefetch is now bitwise ORed:
> > 1 = Normal background swap prefetching when load is light
> > 2 = Aggressively swap prefetch as much as possible
> >
> > And once the "aggressive" bit is set it will prefetch as much as it can
> > and then disable the aggressive bit. 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:
> > http://ck.kolivas.org/patches/swap-prefetch/2.6.16-rc6-mm1-swap_prefetch_
> >suspend_test.patch
> >
> > and the incremental on top of the 4 patches pending for the next -mm is
> > below.
> >
> > Comments and testers most welcome.
>
> Looks okay, but... what happens if I set /proc/sys/vm/swap_prefetch to
> "2"? Do nothing but do it agresively?
>
> Maybe having 0 = off, 1 = normal, 2 = aggressive would be less error
> prone for the users.
2 means aggressively prefetch as much as possible and then disable swap
prefetching from that point on. Too confusing?
Cheers,
Con
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-03-16 10:48 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 ` [ck] " Con Kolivas
2006-03-13 10:43 ` 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 [this message]
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=200603162147.56725.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@suse.cz \
--cc=seife@suse.de \
/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.