A question about terminology.
Hi again.
When I began work on swapfile support, I looked for an efficient method to store all the information on which blocks were used. The process led me to develop something I called ranges, which Pavel later looked at and said something like 'Oh. Extents.'
Throughout the code, I still call them ranges (I have, for example struct range and struct rangechain). In preparation for merging, should I go through an rename ranges to extents, or will they be okay as it is?
Regards,
Nigel
Signature · 2 lines
My work on Software Suspend is graciously brought to you by LinuxFund.org.
Quoted 11 lines · Nigel Cunningham
Hi again.
When I began work on swapfile support, I looked for an efficient method to store all the information on which blocks were used. The process led me to develop something I called ranges, which Pavel later looked at and said something like 'Oh. Extents.'
Throughout the code, I still call them ranges (I have, for example struct range and struct rangechain). In preparation for merging, should I go through an rename ranges to extents, or will they be okay as it is?
Are you aware of the current `struct swap_extent' and its supporting infrastructure?
Hi.
Thanks for the pointer.
I was aware of swap extents, but didn't look at the supporting infrastructure because I originally wrote the code for 2.4, before I looked at porting it to 2.6.
Having said that, I've looked at them now, but think that they probably wouldn't help me.
This is partly because I've ended up using extents to store all the
meta-data: swap addresses, which blocks on the swap devices are used, and which pages are used for what. (Sorry, only mentioning blocks in the previous message did mislead you).
More importantly that that, though, I'm using whole pages for storing the extents, and store the pages in the header of the image (after making them relocatable). They replace the 'pagedirs' in Patrick's and Pavel's implementations.
Regards,
Nigel
Quoted 15 lines · Andrew Morton
Quoted 11 lines · Nigel Cunningham
Hi again.
When I began work on swapfile support, I looked for an efficient method to store all the information on which blocks were used. The process led me to develop something I called ranges, which Pavel later looked at and said something like 'Oh. Extents.'
Throughout the code, I still call them ranges (I have, for example struct range and struct rangechain). In preparation for merging, should I go through an rename ranges to extents, or will they be okay as it is?
Are you aware of the current `struct
swap_extent' and its supporting infrastructure?
Signature · 2 lines
My work on Software Suspend is graciously brought to you by LinuxFund.org.