Re: does swsusp suck after resume for you?

Pavel Machek
2006-03-16T10:46:32Z

> On Thursday 16 March 2006 04:59, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > (It will probably suck. In such case, testing Con's patch would be
> > nice -- after trivial fix rafael pointed out).
>
> Ok here's a patch I've booted and tested with a modification to swap prefetch
> that others might find useful, not just swsusp.
>
> 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.

Pavel

--
Thanks, Sharp!