Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S269421AbUIYWBn (ORCPT ); Sat, 25 Sep 2004 18:01:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S269422AbUIYWBn (ORCPT ); Sat, 25 Sep 2004 18:01:43 -0400 Received: from pop5-1.us4.outblaze.com ([205.158.62.125]:17644 "HELO pop5-1.us4.outblaze.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S269421AbUIYWBk (ORCPT ); Sat, 25 Sep 2004 18:01:40 -0400 Subject: Re: 2.6.9-rc2-mm1 swsusp bug report. From: Nigel Cunningham Reply-To: ncunningham@linuxmail.org To: Pavel Machek Cc: Nick Piggin , Kevin Fenzi , Linux Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: <20040925154527.GA8212@elf.ucw.cz> References: <20040924021956.98FB5A315A@voldemort.scrye.com> <20040924143714.GA826@openzaurus.ucw.cz> <20040924210958.A3C5AA2073@voldemort.scrye.com> <1096069216.3591.16.camel@desktop.cunninghams> <20040925014546.200828E71E@voldemort.scrye.com> <1096113235.5937.3.camel@desktop.cunninghams> <415562FE.3080709@yahoo.com.au> <20040925154527.GA8212@elf.ucw.cz> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1096149821.8359.1.camel@desktop.cunninghams> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6-1mdk Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 08:03:42 +1000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1476 Lines: 39 Hi. On Sun, 2004-09-26 at 01:45, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > >>What causes memory to be so fragmented? > > > > > > > > >Normal usage; the pattern of pages being freed and allocated inevitably > > >leads to fragmentation. The buddy allocator does a good job of > > >minimising it, but what is really needed is a run-time defragmenter. I > > >saw mention of this recently, but it's probably not that practical to > > >implement IMHO. > > > > Well, by this stage it looks like memory is already pretty well shrunk > > as much as it is going to be, which means that even a pretty capable > > defragmenter won't be able to do anything. > > True, defragmenter would not help. > > Anyway, conversion from order-8 allocation should be pretty easy, but > I never seen that failure case and this is first report... So I'm not > doing that work just yet. [There's big chunk of changes waiting in > -mm, that needs to be merged because any other work should be done.] Are we still planning on having suspend2 replace swsusp eventually? It was a lot of work to switch from those high order allocations, and if we are still going to replace swsusp, perhaps it's would be a better use of your time to do other things? Regards, Nigel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/