lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Feb]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
    On Po 20-02-06 10:47:28, Matthias Hensler wrote:
    > On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 01:53:33AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
    > > Only feature I can't do is "save whole pagecache"... and 14000 lines
    > > of code for _that_ is a bit too much. I could probably patch my kernel
    > > to dump pagecache to userspace, but I do not think it is worth the
    > > effort.
    >
    > I do not think that Suspend 2 needs 14000 lines for that, the core is
    > much smaller. But besides, _not_ saving the pagecache is a really _bad_
    > idea. I expect to have my system back after resume, in the same state I
    > had left it prior to suspend. I really do not like it how it is done by
    > Windows, it is just ugly to have a slowly responding system after
    > resume, because all caches and buffers are gone.

    That's okay, swsusp already saves configurable ammount of pagecache.

    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2006-02-20 11:58    [W:4.387 / U:0.192 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site