From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264332AbTDWXzk (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Apr 2003 19:55:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264336AbTDWXzj (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Apr 2003 19:55:39 -0400 Received: from e34.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.132]:62694 "EHLO e34.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264332AbTDWXzf (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Apr 2003 19:55:35 -0400 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 16:57:05 -0700 From: "Martin J. Bligh" To: Pavel Machek , "Grover, Andrew" cc: Nigel Cunningham , Marc Giger , Geert Uytterhoeven , Linux Kernel Development Subject: Re: Fix SWSUSP & !SWAP Message-ID: <1592050000.1051142225@flay> In-Reply-To: <20030424000344.GC32577@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> References: <20030424000344.GC32577@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.2 (Linux/x86) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >> > From: Martin J. Bligh [mailto:mbligh@aracnet.com] >> > Can't you just create a pre-reserved separate swsusp area on >> > disk the size >> > of RAM (maybe a partition rather than a file to make things >> > easier), and >> > then you know you're safe (basically what Marc was >> > suggesting, except pre-allocated)? Or does that make me the >> > prince of all evil? ;-) >> > >> > However much swap space you allocate, it can always all be >> > used, so that seems futile ... >> >> This is what Other OSes do, and I believe this is the correct path. >> Using swap for swsusp is a clever hack but not a 100% solution. > > Well, for normal use its clearly inferior -- suspend partition is unused > when it could be used for speeding system up by swapping out unused > stuff. > > OtherOS approach is better because it can guarantee suspend-to-disk > for critical situations like overheat or battery-critical. > > But we can get best of both worlds if we OOM-kill during critical > suspend. [If suspend partition was not used for swapping, machine > would *already* OOM-killed someone, so we are only improving stuff]. OK ... but at least having the *option* to have a separate reserved area would be nice, no? For most people, RAM is just a tiny amount of their disk space ... and damn, does it make the code simpler ;-) M.