From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264310AbTDWX1M (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Apr 2003 19:27:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264309AbTDWX1M (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Apr 2003 19:27:12 -0400 Received: from e35.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.133]:38047 "EHLO e35.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264310AbTDWX1K (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Apr 2003 19:27:10 -0400 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 16:28:44 -0700 From: "Martin J. Bligh" To: Nigel Cunningham , Marc Giger cc: Pavel Machek , Geert Uytterhoeven , Linux Kernel Development Subject: Re: Fix SWSUSP & !SWAP Message-ID: <1584040000.1051140524@flay> In-Reply-To: <1051136725.4439.5.camel@laptop-linux> References: <20030423135100.GA320@elf.ucw.cz><20030423144705.GA2823@elf.ucw.cz> <20030423175629.7cfc9087.gigerstyle@gmx.ch><1051126871.1893.35.camel@laptop-linux><20030423223639.7cc6a796.gigerstyle@gmx.ch> <1051136725.4439.5.camel@laptop-linux> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.2 (Linux/x86) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > On Thu, 2003-04-24 at 08:36, Marc Giger wrote: >> Ok! I see the advantages / disadvantages of each version. But what >> happens if the memory AND swap space are full and nothing can't be >> freed? When I watch the memory and swap consumption on my laptop, I >> think it's the most time the case... > > If you're getting yourself in that situation, you should be increasing > your swap space (and memory if possible) anyway. > >> Another question: >> Is it a big problem to save the memory in a separate file on the file >> system, and save somewhere the pointer to it (as example in swap. Also >> we could set a flag in swap so that we now that the last shutdown was >> a hybernation). One Problem will be, that we don't know the filesystem >> type on resume...(We could save the module in swap...) >> All that is just theoretical. It's only a idea. > > I guess the simplest answer is would it be worth the pain? Since disk > space is cheap, it just requires a little forethought when installing > Linux, to ensure enough swap is allocated. I certainly understand that > using a file rather than swap makes adjusting the amount of space > available easier, but as you rightly acknowledge, it does complicate > things a fair bit more. Can't you just create a pre-reserved separate swsusp area on disk the size of RAM (maybe a partition rather than a file to make things easier), and then you know you're safe (basically what Marc was suggesting, except pre-allocated)? Or does that make me the prince of all evil? ;-) However much swap space you allocate, it can always all be used, so that seems futile ... M.