From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964791AbWGHLmI (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Jul 2006 07:42:08 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964799AbWGHLmI (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Jul 2006 07:42:08 -0400 Received: from beauty.rexursive.com ([203.171.74.242]:50329 "EHLO beauty.rexursive.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964791AbWGHLmH (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Jul 2006 07:42:07 -0400 Subject: Re: uswsusp history lesson [was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: swsusp / suspend2 reliability] From: Bojan Smojver To: Nigel Cunningham Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Pavel Machek , Avuton Olrich , Olivier Galibert , jan@rychter.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, suspend2-devel@lists.suspend2.net, grundig In-Reply-To: <200607082131.47832.ncunningham@linuxmail.org> References: <20060627133321.GB3019@elf.ucw.cz> <200607081342.40686.ncunningham@linuxmail.org> <200607081238.16753.rjw@sisk.pl> <200607082131.47832.ncunningham@linuxmail.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2006 21:42:03 +1000 Message-Id: <1152358923.2556.6.camel@coyote.rexursive.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.2 (2.6.2-1.fc5.5) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 2006-07-08 at 21:31 +1000, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > It's only too slow on swsusp. With Suspend2, I regularly suspend 1GB images on > both my desktop and laptop machines. I agree that it might be slower on a > 4200RPM laptop drive, but you also have to balance this against faulting the > pages back in post resume (which will be slower because they're not > compressed and contiguous then, though maybe not not as noticable if you're > saving 75% of memory). I'm one of those unlucky people with a 4200 RPM notebook drive, coupled with a crappy P4 based Celeron CPU. By far, Suspend2 provides a better user experience than swsusp, even when saving all of 700+ MB or RAM. -- Bojan