On Sun, Nov 07, 2004 at 01:06:04PM +0100, Martin Husemann wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 07, 2004 at 01:24:18PM +0200, Jukka Marin wrote:
> > Is it possible that this patch could prevent adding a large swap
> > partition?
> 
> Which version did you apply? The initial one had a *1024 too many and
> reserved 256 MB instead of 256 k.

Yeah, I forgot about that (just blindly applied the patch).  I fixed
the memory allocation size and it works now.

> Note that there is kernel memory overhead using swap. IIRC it's
> couple bytes per configured swap page, and it doesn't depend on
> how much swap is actually used. That's probably why the attempt to
> configure 16GB swap failed.

I guess so.  Maybe it isn't such a good idea having a 16 GB swap partition.
I thought that would let all those gimp / netscape / opera / whatever
bloated processes to grow a bit longer before forcing a restart..

  -jm