Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751173AbWBUM2A (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Feb 2006 07:28:00 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932230AbWBUM2A (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Feb 2006 07:28:00 -0500 Received: from gprs189-60.eurotel.cz ([160.218.189.60]:59841 "EHLO amd.ucw.cz") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751173AbWBUM17 (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Feb 2006 07:27:59 -0500 Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 13:27:28 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: Nigel Cunningham Cc: Dmitry Torokhov , Andreas Happe , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Suspend2 Devel List Subject: Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.) Message-ID: <20060221122728.GA21807@elf.ucw.cz> References: <20060201113710.6320.68289.stgit@localhost.localdomain> <200602211257.29161.ncunningham@cyclades.com> <200602202319.15018.dtor_core@ameritech.net> <200602211551.12379.ncunningham@cyclades.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <200602211551.12379.ncunningham@cyclades.com> X-Warning: Reading this can be dangerous to your mental health. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1473 Lines: 30 On ?t 21-02-06 15:51:08, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > Hi. > > On Tuesday 21 February 2006 14:19, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > On Monday 20 February 2006 21:57, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > > For the record, my thinking went: swsusp uses n (12?) bytes of meta data > > > for every page you save, where as using bitmaps makes that much closer to > > > a constant value (a small variable amount for recording where the image > > > will be stored in extents). 12 bytes per page is 3MB/1GB. If swsusp was > > > to add support for multiple swap partitions or writing to files, those > > > requirements might be closer to 5MB/GB. > > > > 5MB/GB amounts to 0.5% overhead, I don't think you should be concerned > > here. Much more important IMHO is that IIRC swsusp requires to be able to > > free 1/2 of the physical memory whuch is hard on low memory boxes. > > Agreed. I'll look for related issues, and if there are none (or nothing > serious), we can have one less difference between the two implementations. I > may even be able to share the lowlevel code with Pavel then. That would be a > good step forward. Yep, that would be very nice. Pavel -- Web maintainer for suspend.sf.net (www.sf.net/projects/suspend) wanted... - 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/