SD card unpartitioned space -- used for swap?

C. Scott Ananian cscott at
Mon Nov 22 12:06:44 EST 2010

As my own clarification: I wasn't dismissing possible performance
improvements (of any kind).  I was just commenting on the old "lockup"
bugs, saying this might not actually be related to no-swap-space,
although it's possible memory pressure exacerbates the problem.  For
performance issues, you have to balance against the risks.  If it
enables you to run ooo, maybe it's worth it.  It seems you might also
be introducing a configuration management issue, though, where only
some units with a given SKU can run (say) OOo.

On Monday, November 22, 2010, Daniel Drake <dsd at> wrote:
> On 22 November 2010 16:41, Martin Langhoff <martin.langhoff at> wrote:
>> Just to clarify -- side-to-side comparison in the past have shown a
>> significant improvement. We did get a specially bad-behaving kernel in
>> our F7 builds in that regard, but even F9 builds have shown it to be
>> better.
> That was an XO-1 comparison though.
> I haven't heard of similar problems existing for XO-1.5, but my field
> experience there is much less. Are there known situations where adding
> swap actually helps?
> Another thing to consider would be the current series of patches going
> into Linux that improve interactivity under high CPU/memory pressure.
> Certainly candidates for inclusion if we can briefly show their value.
> Daniel

                         ( )

More information about the Devel mailing list