On Thursday 29 June 2006 00:46, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Thu 2006-06-29 00:37:57, Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> > On Thursday 29 June 2006 00:24, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > > Okay, can I get some details? Like how much memory does system
> > > > > have, what stress test causes the failure?
> > > >
> > > > The machine has 1GB of RAM, filling it up beyond 500MB, maybe 600MB
> > > > usually made swsusp a problem. I'd need to close apps then to be able
> > > > to suspend.
> > >
> > > I'm pretty sure I do suspending with most of RAM full. You have
> > > big-enough swap partition, right?
> >
> > 1 GB, it might not be completely empty though. I probably only hit swsusp
> > limit much earlier than suspend2's (which after 34 suspend/resume cycles
> > and heavy use in between I did not hit yet).

I'll try to see what I can do, it might take some time though. Quite busy at 
the moment and preparing for vacation, lucky me. :-)

And to be honest, since suspend2 works perfectly well here, it's not extremely 
high on my list of priorities (talking about scratching an itch), swsusp just 
misses too much stuff I heavily rely upon, and I'm used to for years. Sad 
enough I have to go through this again, after having helped out with testing 
suspend2 for more than three years.

> Okay, can we get bugzilla.kernel.org report? (assigned-to me)
>
> This really should not happen, and I did not see swsusp fail like that
> for quite a long time. I _could_ make it fail with make -j on kernel,
> and similar crazy loads, but on nothing reasonable.
>
> dmesg from failed run would be nice, too.
-- 
sebas

 http://www.kde.org | http://vizZzion.org |  GPG Key ID: 9119 0EF9 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Nothing ever becomes real until it is experienced. - John Keats