Hi!
> Great, with this patch I can setup an encrypted swap partition,
> and resume from it (after the initramfs asked for the password
> and set up the dm-crypt table).
>
> But wait, I'm using swapfiles. swap is fine with files.
> what about swsuspend? and if it works with files, too,
> what abou
On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 11:35:12 +, Andrew Morton wrote:
> I don't understand how this can be affected by the modularness of the
> kernel. Can you explain a little more?
>
> Would it not be simpler to just add "resume=03:02" to the boot command line?
initramfs can also be used to ask for a passp
Great, with this patch I can setup an encrypted swap partition,
and resume from it (after the initramfs asked for the password
and set up the dm-crypt table).
But wait, I'm using swapfiles. swap is fine with files.
what about swsuspend? and if it works with files, too,
what about this resume inter
Hi!
> > > By the way, did you see the effect of the memory eating patch? I didn't
> > > think about it until someone emailed me, but the improvement was 50x
> > > speed in the best case!
> >
> > Well, more interesting was that you actually freed much more memory
> > with your patch. *You actually
Hi Pavel et al.
On Sat, 2005-03-05 at 04:50, Barry K. Nathan wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 03:04:10AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > I don't understand how this can be affected by the modularness of the
> > kernel. Can you explain a little more?
> >
> > Would it not be simpler to just add "r
Hi.
On Sat, 2005-03-05 at 08:43, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > You guys are reinventing the wheel a lot at the moment and I'm in the
> > middle of doing it for x86_64 lowlevel code :> Can we see if we can work
> > a little more closely - perhaps we can get some shared code going that
> > will allow us t
Hi!
> > > I don't understand how this can be affected by the modularness of the
> > > kernel. Can you explain a little more?
> > >
> > > Would it not be simpler to just add "resume=03:02" to the boot command
> > > line?
> >
> > In addition to what others have mentioned, there's also the situat
Hi!
> > > You guys are reinventing the wheel a lot at the moment and I'm in the
> > > middle of doing it for x86_64 lowlevel code :> Can we see if we can work
> > > a little more closely - perhaps we can get some shared code going that
> > > will allow us to handle these issues without stepping on
Hi.
On Sat, 2005-03-05 at 09:55, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > All that to say "Bitmaps were a definite win!". Perhaps I can sell you
> > on the advantages of using them :>
>
> Not sure, if one bit goes wrong you put everything in the wrong places
> :-). Linklist seems just okay to me, no > 4K allocati
Hi!
> > Hmm, bitmaps? Okay, then low-level code needs to stay separate. (And
> > thats bad, I wanted that one to be shared most).
>
> Mmm. As you might remember, I used extents from 1.0 to save space. The
> feedback from the last submission to LKML about getting rid of the
> page_alloc.c hooks ma
Hi.
On Sat, 2005-03-05 at 09:07, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > > You guys are reinventing the wheel a lot at the moment and I'm in the
> > > > middle of doing it for x86_64 lowlevel code :> Can we see if we can work
> > > > a little more closely - perhaps we can get some shared code going tha
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 03:04:10AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> I don't understand how this can be affected by the modularness of the
> kernel. Can you explain a little more?
>
> Would it not be simpler to just add "resume=03:02" to the boot command line?
In addition to what others have mention
Andrew Morton wrote:
> I don't understand how this can be affected by the modularness of the
> kernel. Can you explain a little more?
normally, resume takes place _before_ the initramfs is entered. If your
swap device depends on a module that is loaded from initramfs, you are lost.
This patch (
Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Would it not be simpler to just add "resume=03:02" to the boot command line?
Some devices have random device numbers.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo
Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> When using a fully modularized kernel it is necessary to activate
> resume manually as the device node might not be available during
> kernel init.
I don't understand how this can be affected by the modularness of the
kernel. Can you explain a little
On Pá 04-03-05 03:04:10, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > When using a fully modularized kernel it is necessary to activate
> > resume manually as the device node might not be available during
> > kernel init.
>
> I don't understand how this can be affected
Hi!
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
When using a fully modularized kernel it is necessary to activate
resume manually as the device node might not be available during
kernel init.
This patch implements a new sysfs attribute '/sys/power/resume' which
allows for manual activation of software resume. When
17 matches
Mail list logo
