Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ubuntu Is Working On Much Faster Hibernation/Resume Support

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ubuntu Is Working On Much Faster Hibernation/Resume Support

    Phoronix: Ubuntu Is Working On Much Faster Hibernation/Resume Support

    Canonical's Andrea Righi who is on the Ubuntu Kernel Team sent out a set of patches last week working on opportunistic memory reclaim support as a means of achieving much speedier system hibernation and resume performance...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...er-Hibernation

  • #2
    Wow, 4x~13x improvement

    Comment


    • #3
      How does one enable hibernation on Ubuntu? It never worked for me tbh.

      Comment


      • #4
        Hm currently they are building the initial packages for kernel 5.7 for groovy: https://launchpad.net/~canonical-ker..._filter=groovy

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by anarki2 View Post
          How does one enable hibernation on Ubuntu? It never worked for me tbh.

          My guess, as I don't remember seeing the option in power management on my laptops, is that it doesn't show up as an option if there's some ACPI blacklist or incompatibility going on. I'd like some clarity on that myself.

          Comment


          • #6
            Is sleep and hibernation the same thing..?

            Comment


            • #7
              No.

              Sleep keeps the RAM powered on whereas hibernate saves the RAM to swap and powers down completely.

              Comment


              • #8
                They plan to support the Ubuntu Desktop on RPi4 for release 20.10 as well.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Faster hibernation would be quite nice, seeing as SSDs have made hibernate pretty much redundant. But what is proposed here seems dangerous and rather hard to implement properly. But if the devs think they can crack this nut, kudos to them.

                  Also, wth are the hibernating that it takes 51s? Hibernate didn't take me 51s even when I was using a mechanical HDD (as I said, I found very little use for hibernate after I moved to SSD).

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by bug77 View Post
                    Also, wth are the hibernating that it takes 51s? Hibernate didn't take me 51s even when I was using a mechanical HDD (as I said, I found very little use for hibernate after I moved to SSD).
                    Considering the key audience here is servers, memory could be hundreds of gigabytes filled with juicy application-level caches like JIT-compiled code.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X