>> For 2.5 we could perhaps think about a new swapfile layout > The format seems to be just fine. No, the present definition is terrible. Read the mkswap source. A forest of #ifdefs, and still sometimes user assistance is required because mkswap cannot always figure out what the "pagesize" is. There are two main problems: (i) "new" swap is hardly larger than "old" swap (ii) the unit in which new swap is measured is a mystery So, the next swap space has (i) a signature "SWAPSPACE3", (ii) (not strictly necessary) a size given as a 64-bit number in bytes. Moreover, the swapon call must not refuse swapspaces that are larger than the kernel can handle. Andries - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Re: 2.4 and 2GB swap partitio... Kenneth Johansson
- Re: 2.4 and 2GB swap partitio... David Lang
- Re: 2.4 and 2GB swap partitio... Rogier Wolff
- Re: 2.4 and 2GB swap partitio... Alan Cox
- RE: 2.4 and 2GB swap partition limit Matt_Domsch
- Re: 2.4 and 2GB swap partition limit Christoph Rohland
- Re: 2.4 and 2GB swap partition limit Matti Aarnio
- Re: 2.4 and 2GB swap partition limit Rik van Riel
- Re: 2.4 and 2GB swap partition limit Rik van Riel
- Re: 2.4 and 2GB swap partition limit Christoph Hellwig
- RE: 2.4 and 2GB swap partition limit Andries . Brouwer
- RE: 2.4 and 2GB swap partition limit Torrey Hoffman
- RE: 2.4 and 2GB swap partition limit Richard B. Johnson
- RE: 2.4 and 2GB swap partition limit David S. Miller
- RE: 2.4 and 2GB swap partition limit Richard B. Johnson
- Re: 2.4 and 2GB swap partition limit Andreas Ferber
- Re: 2.4 and 2GB swap partition limit Andi Kleen
- Re: 2.4 and 2GB swap partition limit Andreas Dilger
- Re: 2.4 and 2GB swap partition limit Ishikawa