Hi!
> > > That would just cover the problem that the bitmap data structure and the
> > > algorithm in swsusp_free do not scale well on bigmem machines.
> >
> > And is it a problem? Hibernation of 12TB machine will take 6 hours if
> > you back your swap with SSDs.
> >
> > Does not scale == burns additional 60 seconds of CPU time. I think we
> > can live with that...
>
> Problem is that these 76s are burned every time, whether you just use
> 500MB or the full 12TB of the machine.
On 12TB machine, how much memory is used after boot finishes? I
suspect it is not 500MB.
> Next problem is that the bitmaps are allocated (and need to be freed)
> without even being sure that a resume will happen.
Could we fix that instead? Allocating bitmaps before we see
hibernation signature is a bug.
[How long does 12TB machine boot?]
> > ...because noone sane will hibernate 12TB machine.
>
> And Linux is only made for sane people? Thats pretty new to me ;-)
Yeah, but please don't optimize for insane people :-).
> > Yes, that's why I propose to apply just patch 6 -- to avoid soft
> > lockup warnings.
>
> Only patch 6 would wrap the problem with the soft lockups, but the other
> patches actually improve the resume and boot situation on those
> machines.
Yeah. Provide timings for 12TB machine suspending/resuming and we may
talk about it.
#6 is bugfix. We should take it. Rest is performance improvement for
insane config. I don't think we should take it.
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures)
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
