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: 63+ 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
2006-03-27 23:57 ` Jun OKAJIMA
2006-03-28 0:28 ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-03-28 12:48 ` [Xen-devel] " 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 4:41 ` Nick Piggin
2006-03-18 4:46 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-18 4:52 ` Nick Piggin
2006-03-18 4:56 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-18 5:44 ` Nick Piggin
2006-03-18 6:14 ` Con Kolivas
2006-03-18 8:30 ` Nick Piggin
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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox