On Thursday, December 5, 2019 1:40:02 PM MST Chris Murphy wrote: > Hibernation is out of scope to rely on, let alone make a default, for > at least the following reasons: > a. It's not sufficiently well supported upstream for regressions that > may appear in new kernels, and not supported by the Fedora kernel > team. I'm not sure who told you this, but that's not the case. Hibernation is supported in Fedora. > b. It's disabled by kernel lockdown on UEFI Secure Boot systems. How so? What "kernel lockdown" are you referring to? > c. Resource requirements are excessive, there's no dynamic allocation > so to be safe you need to allocate a minimum of 1x RAM for a swap > partition used for a hibernation image. As a consequence, there's now > an excessive amount of relatively slow swap which can result in swap > thrashing and the effective loss of the system. See "Better > interactivity in low-memory situations " > https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issue/98 What are you talking about? You should have at least 1x RAM for swap whether you use hibernation or not. If you're having issues, you can adjust the swappiness as needed. There is no "effective loss of the system" involved. > d. There's no release criterion. Therefore the project wouldn't block > release on any discovered bugs. Serious bugs would likely lead to > reverting any use of hibernation by default, and so it's not at all > likely it'll become supported by default. Blockers are dynamic. We can make new blockers if we need them. -- John M. Harris, Jr. Splentity _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
