Re: uswsusp history lesson [was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: swsusp / suspend2 reliability]

Nigel Cunningham
2006-07-09T00:02:49Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1402 bytes --]

Hi.

On Sunday 09 July 2006 09:54, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > > > 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
> > >
> > > uswsusp is as fast as suspend2. It does same LZF compression.
> >
> > I agree for uncompressed images - I tried timing the writing of the image
> > yesterday. I'm not sure about LZF though, because I couldn't get it to
> > resume. I'd be interested to see it really be as fast as suspend2 with
> > compression.
>
> Is there any way to help you? I assume normal swsusp resumes okay so
> it is not driver problem?

That's right. I'll see if I can figure it out tomorrow, Lord willing. I
have /dev/snapshot in my initrd but it gives that prompt asking for the
device name. By the way, will it sit there foreever, or does that have a
timeout?

> > > Do you think you could get some repeatable benchmark for Rafael? He
> > > worked quite hard on feature only to find out it makes little
> > > difference...
> >
> > Sure, but it will mean more if all of the tests are run on the same
> > system, so I'll have another go at getting uswsusp to resume, when I get
> > the chance.
>
> Thanks.

No problem.

Nigel

--
Nigel, Michelle and Alisdair Cunningham
5 Mitchell Street
Cobden 3266
Victoria, Australia

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]