lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Jul]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: uswsusp history lesson [was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: swsusp / suspend2 reliability]
    Date
    On Wednesday 12 July 2006 00:01, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
    > On Wednesday 12 July 2006 07:54, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
    > > On Tuesday 11 July 2006 14:45, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
    > > > On Sunday 09 July 2006 04:52, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
    > > > > Well, I tried really hard to justify the patch that allowed swsusp to
    > > > > create bigger images and 10% was the greatest speedup I could get out
    > > > > of it and, let me repeat, _with_ compression and async I/O. I tried to
    > > > > simulate different workloads etc., but I couldn't get more than 10%
    > > > > speedup (the biggest image I got was as big as 80% of RAM) - counting
    > > > > the time from issuing the suspend command to getting back _responsive_
    > > > > system after resume.
    > > >
    > > > Was that 10% speedup on suspend or resume, or both? With LZF, I see
    > > > approximately double the speed with both reading and writing:
    > >
    > > I was not referring to the speedup of writing and/or reading.
    > >
    > > The exercise was to measure the time needed to suspend the system and get
    > > it back in a responsive state. I measured the time elapsed between
    > > triggering the suspend and the moment at which I could switch between some
    > > applications in X without any noticeable lag due to faulting in some pages
    > > (that is a bit subjective, I must admit, but I was willing to show that
    > > bigger images make substantial difference).
    > >
    > > I tested uswsusp with compression (LZF) and two image sizes: 120 MB and
    > > (IIRC) about 220 MB on a 256 MB box. The result of the measurement for the
    > > 120 MB image has always been greater than for the 220 MB image, but the
    > > difference has never been greater than 10%.
    >
    > Ah ok. Are you sure you're getting that sort of throughput with LZF though -
    > if you're not, you might be underestimating the advantage.

    Certainly I don't get that kind of speedup for writing. For reading I do.

    Greetings,
    Rafael
    -
    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: 2006-07-12 00:37    [W:2.364 / U:0.016 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site