On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 9:02 AM, Bastien Nocera <bnocera@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:26:14AM -0400, Bastien Nocera wrote: >> > >> > >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 09:30:31AM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: >> > > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 3:07 AM, Bastien Nocera <bnocera@xxxxxxxxxx> >> > > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> > > > >> OK not everyone is on the same page, apparently. This bug was just >> > > > >> closed by Anaconda as WONTFIX. >> > > > >> >> > > > >> suggested swap for laptop seems low >> > > > >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1037472 >> > > > >> >> > > > >> I don't see how hibernation works reliably with such a low default >> > > > >> swap >> > > > >> size. >> > > > > >> > > > > This isn't the way to fix it. The hibernation file/partition should >> > > > > really be independent >> > > > > of swap, because 1) you can't be sure how much swap will actually be >> > > > > used >> > > > > by the applications >> > > > > so you can't be sure you'll ever have enough swap to save the RAM 2) >> > > > > Too >> > > > > much swap and the >> > > > > (lack of) interactivity will make you want to advocate physical >> > > > > violence >> > > > > when your machine >> > > > > is unusable for an hour because of a hungry Javascript in your 50th >> > > > > Firefox tab. >> > > > >> > > > Windows and OS X both use swapfiles rather than swap partition, and a >> > > > sleep image file rather than a partition. OS X's swapfiles are >> > > > dynamically created on demand in variable size increments. >> > > I think the problem is in the ways filesystems are implemented. The >> > > fs has to be mounted to access the swap file, and this can change the >> > > fs, even with a read-only mount. Because we don't have >> > > really-read-only fs mounting, we need to support swap-as-partition, so >> > > we might just as well use it by default. >> > > >> > > > Both OS's have a feature that I find invaluable on a laptop which is >> > > > the automatic switch from suspend-to-RAM to suspend-to-disk. >> > > Yes, integrating with firmware would be great. So far this hasn't been >> > > hapenning... >> > > What we can do instead is use hybrid sleep. It's not smart at all, >> > > and doesn't prevent your battery from draining completely, but it does >> > > protect >> > > your data. >> > > >> > > Systemd supports hybrid-sleep as another option analogous to suspend >> > > and hibernation, so for anything using systemd to suspend swithing to >> > > hybrid should be trivial. Maybe we should make this an F23 goal: >> > > - use hybrid-sleep from Gnome and other DE by default >> > >> > Hybrid sleep as offered in systemd still is just suspend + hibernation, and >> > the way we do hibernation is broken. >> Can you be more specific? Do you consider hibernate-to-swap-partition >> unacceptable? > > I think that conflating "memory-to-disk swap space" with "I can hibernate my machine" > is unacceptable. We need a new partition type that Anaconda would setup, or > a whitelist of laptops with firmwares that support rapid start (and again, Anaconda > to set it up), or use a temporary file of any sort to store the hibernation data. I'm willing to bet there's an incongruence between IRST and multiboot. > > If my machine has 8 gigs of memory, I don't want to need 8 gigs plus of swap to be > able to hibernate it, when run away processes can make my machine unusable for hours > if they start hitting that swap. Googling brings up the swapspace project for dynamically creating swapfiles. However, for Btrfs and LVM thinp installs, I think the base swap code needs revisiting to defer rw through the fs rather than assuming direct rw is workable. -- Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
