Re: [PATCH 1/2] Documentation: clarify limitations of hibernation

[Luigi Semenzato <semenzato@google.com>]

Thank you Chris, those are excellent comments.

I am replacing "memory pressure" with "memory usage".  I had used
"pressure" because "usage" is vague and here we specifically refer to
non-reclaimable pages.  But it's true that "pressure" has a different,
specific meaning for the mm, so "usage" is better.  The example should
clarify the problem.

I am also removing the workaround.  I thought it may be useful, but as
you said, it's quite debatable that it belongs here.

On Fri, Dec 27, 2019 at 4:25 PM Chris Down <chris@chrisdown.name> wrote:
>
> Oh, and:
>
> Luigi Semenzato writes:
> >+system to be present for the underlying CPU architecture.  Additionally, the
> >+current implementation can enter the hibernation state only when memory
> >+pressure is low (see "Limitations" below).
>
> This doesn't seem to make much sense to me. You claim it only works when
> pressure is low, but then suggest people raise pressure to fix it.
>
> I suppose you mean "only when memory *usage* is low"? I mean, if memory
> pressure is low, then it's likely to result in these cold pages sitting around
> in the first place.