From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Feb 17 16:49:29 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from apollo.backplane.com (apollo.backplane.com [209.157.86.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC423112B6; Wed, 17 Feb 1999 16:49:27 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dillon@apollo.backplane.com) Received: (from dillon@localhost) by apollo.backplane.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) id QAA13082; Wed, 17 Feb 1999 16:49:24 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dillon) Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 16:49:24 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Dillon Message-Id: <199902180049.QAA13082@apollo.backplane.com> To: Wilko Bulte Cc: eivind@FreeBSD.ORG (Eivind Eklund), brandon@roguetrader.com, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: savecore before swapon? References: <199902171836.TAA00897@yedi.iaf.nl> Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG :Or start allocating swap 'backwards' from the high block# on the disk :downwards. Assuming swap > physical mem and dumps starting at swap offset 0 :this should be safe at all times (unless fsck really allocates all swap :of course ;-) : :But this might be a lot of work, I'm not familiar with the VM. : :Wilko :_ ______________________________________________________________________ : | / o / / _ Arnhem, The Netherlands : |/|/ / / /( (_) Bulte WWW : http://www.tcja.nl Hmm. Well, I don't want to reverse-index the swap allocation but it would be possible to set the hinting on the swap radix tree bitmap to allocate higher swap blocks first. I think it would be a little too much of a hack to be worthy of the kernel, though. -Matt Matthew Dillon To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message