From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264254AbTDXDiC (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Apr 2003 23:38:02 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264255AbTDXDiB (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Apr 2003 23:38:01 -0400 Received: from 60.54.252.64.snet.net ([64.252.54.60]:7607 "EHLO hotmale.blue-labs.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264254AbTDXDiA (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Apr 2003 23:38:00 -0400 Message-ID: <3EA75EDD.20605@blue-labs.org> Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 23:49:49 -0400 From: David Ford User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030421 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pavel Machek CC: "Grover, Andrew" , "Martin J. Bligh" , Nigel Cunningham , Marc Giger , Geert Uytterhoeven , Linux Kernel Development Subject: Re: Fix SWSUSP & !SWAP References: <20030424000344.GC32577@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> In-Reply-To: <20030424000344.GC32577@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org I honestly don't see OOMing as an acceptable practice. If I wanted to kill a bunch of stuff just to suspend, I would have simply shut the system down. That isn't my intent or desire. I want to suspend the system just as it is without OOMing a bunch of programs. David Pavel Machek wrote: >Hi! > > > >>>From: Martin J. Bligh [mailto:mbligh@aracnet.com] >>>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 ... >>> >>> >>This is what Other OSes do, and I believe this is the correct path. >>Using swap for swsusp is a clever hack but not a 100% solution. >> >> > >Well, for normal use its clearly inferior -- suspend partition is unused >when it could be used for speeding system up by swapping out unused >stuff. > >OtherOS approach is better because it can guarantee suspend-to-disk >for critical situations like overheat or battery-critical. > >But we can get best of both worlds if we OOM-kill during critical >suspend. [If suspend partition was not used for swapping, machine >would *already* OOM-killed someone, so we are only improving stuff]. > > Pavel > > >