[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <gu017d$g2s$1@ger.gmane.org>
Date: Thu, 07 May 2009 21:17:32 -0400
From: Shannon McMackin <smcmackin@...il.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: tuxonice-devel@...ts.tuxonice.net
Subject: Re: [TuxOnIce-devel] [RFC] TuxOnIce
trekker.dk@...trum.cz wrote:
> Well...
>
>>
>> To summarise disadvantages:
>>
>> - only core has 8000 LoC
>> - it does stuff that can be easily done in userspace
>> (and that todays distros _do_ in userspace).
>> - it duplicates uswsusp functionality.
>> - compared to [u]swsusp, it received little testing
>>
>
> To summarise advatages - for me tuxonice is the only hibernation method that works.
> (Till now I've had 3 machines - no one of them able to resume with in-kernel swsusp.)
>
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TuxOnIce-devel mailing list
>> TuxOnIce-devel@...ts.tuxonice.net
>> http://lists.tuxonice.net/mailman/listinfo/tuxonice-devel
>>
>
Just to add my 2 cents as a user of TOI. Every distro and release I've
tried has one major issue with kernel hibernation. Upon resume when
hibernating large images, there's a residual footprint in swap. Every
further hibernation creates a larger footprint, to the order of an
additional 5-7% each time. Nobody has ever cared in any forum to
explain why or how I might change that.
TOI does not do this and that's why I've been using it on every distro I
can for the past 4 or 5 years. I for one would love to see TOI
capability added to the mainline to improve functionality and
performance. If we can't get all 3 maintained, then 2 that are better
would seem to suffice...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists