Search Results for 'swap'

[Member seaken64]

I remember back in the day installing Vector Linux using a boot floppy and then doing full install by swapping in a lot of floppies. Debian also does a net install. We can have a minimal installer that gets the user to the internet. Or, two CD’s, a “boot” CD and then a “Please insert CD #2 and hit enter to continue”.

I have a few CD only systems. But I either use Plop or move the hard disk to another machine to install then put it back in the CD-only machine. For most of us this is an inconvenience only, we can handle the tech part. But as Roki pointed out some folks will not be able to handle the tech.

I like the idea of limiting the installed software to keep under the 650/700 limit.

Seaken64

[Member Xecure]

HateDogsBarking wrote:

Is it best practice to suspend or hibernate if I leave the computer for one to three hours?

That is a matter of opinion. Here is a bit of info to make up your mind.

Suspend stores the computer state in RAM. To keep the information there requires a bit of energy (very very small amount), but everything else is in rest. very fast to restore your session after “waking up”.
Hibernate requires SWAP. It stores the current state of the computer in the Hard Drive (swap partition). It uses even less energy to maintain this state. Takes longer to “wake up”.

My opinion: suspend is better. It is faster and doesn’t waste write cycles on the hard drive. But for very long “dead” sessions (many days suspended), hibernate is better.

antiX Live system enthusiast.
General Live Boot Parameters for antiX.

[Member mroot]

edited—— corrected link

Ah, I see your mainly using swap files instead of partitions. I looked at the z3fold allocator you were talking about earlier in the thread. It looks like it has some advantages. I found an entry on kernel.org talking about z3fold and how it compares to the default allocator zbud.

here is the link:

https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/vm/z3fold.html

I also think z3fold would allow you to use a compression algorithm with a compression ratio as high as 3:1, something like zstandard.

• This reply was modified 2 years, 10 months ago by mroot.

[Moderator Brian Masinick]

I would add that if your system runs well and has enough memory to avoid swapping and the overall performance is acceptable, don’t worry about it.
We don’t all have great new hardware though, and so we DO try to keep some of the antiX variations as lean and efficient as possible.

My Dell Inspiron 5558 laptop ran any and all workloads quickly and efficiently when it was new. Today it still works, but I’d say that CPU, memory, and disk utilization DO matter for me, and it’s not that they are all FULL; they’re not. I rarely if ever swap, yet the response is not necessarily what it once was.
Chances are my disks are fragmented to some extent, but whatever the cause, performance DOES matter. If I could just run out and buy a $2000 system that would be great. Since I am retired I don’t want to do that until absolutely necessary. For me, I won’t be running the desktop environment software very often, and if I do it’s the lean ones that aren’t too heavily configured; they at least work for me without waiting 5 minutes for simple operations.

• This reply was modified 2 years, 10 months ago by Brian Masinick.

--
Brian Masinick

[Member rayluo]

mroot wrote:

First your swap partition is small compared to amount of ram you have. Generally, it’s recommended for a laptop to have a swap partition that is least a bit bigger than the amount of ram you have (2 gigs) so you can use the hibernation function. Generally, larger is better. I think a swap partition in the 2.2 to 4 gigs range is perfectly reasonable if you have space on the hard drive or you can make some space by shrinking another partition.

Yes I know the conventional wisdom of having a swap with 2x of the size of ram. My setup has a 256MB swap partition which is on by default, but I also have several swapfiles, 1 gig per file, located in my hard disk, so that I can “sudo swapon /path/to/one-gig-swapfile”, “sudo swapon /path/to/one-more-gig” on demand. More swap did not seem to make a difference when thrashing happens. And again, personally I have that habit of turning off swap, dating back to my Windows XP days. (PS: It turns out Jennings described my habit better than I could do 🙂 in his 9th slide: “In the memory thrashing case, some would prefer to run their systems swap-less and have their workload fall victim to the Out Of Memory (OOM) killer rather than take the non-deterministic latency and performance degradation that I/O introduces”. And that was also the reasoning behind my question in my another thread “can antiX/Linux be still responsive even when running out of memory”.)

mroot wrote:

The second and more important reason is discussed by Jennings in his presentation. Since zswap is a cache it has to be able to address a corresponding address in the swap device. In other words each Mb of cache needs a Mb of swap space it can address and then write to if/when needed. If it doesn’t have that swap space then the zswap cache stops growing and may never reach the allocation limit you set

Good point! I’ll watch that presentation and also enlarge my swap. Interestingly though, in my day 1 experiment, zswap seemed to still make a difference despite with only 256 MB swap.

[Member mroot]

I found two documents made by Seth Jennings- the guy who came up with zswap.

The first is a slideshow he made. In it he explains how it works and has graphs showing the performance benefits.

https://events.static.linuxfound.org/sites/events/files/slides/tmc_sjennings_linuxcon2013.pdf

The second is a youtube video of Jennings presenting the slideshow at a conference. It has more detail and he explains terms in the slideshow. It also helps to better understand the link about performance that I included in my previous email.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYLzokeRtd0

Raylou- I looked at yourinxi -Fxz output from the other thread. It looks like your swap partition is only 256Mb in size. I think you would want to enlarge it if possible for two reasons.

First your swap partition is small compared to amount of ram you have. Generally, it’s recommended for a laptop to have a swap partition that is least a bit bigger than the amount of ram you have (2 gigs) so you can use the hibernation function. Generally, larger is better. I think a swap partition in the 2.2 to 4 gigs range is perfectly reasonable if you have space on the hard drive or you can make some space by shrinking another partition.

The second and more important reason is discussed by Jennings in his presentation. Since zswap is a cache it has to be able to address a corresponding address in the swap device. In other words each Mb of cache needs a Mb of swap space it can address and then write to if/when needed. If it doesn’t have that swap space then the zswap cache stops growing and may never reach the allocation limit you set (the default is 20%). So in your case zswap will use 256 Mb of ram instead of growing to 20% of the 2 gigs of ram in your system which is specified by the allocation limit. It also means enlarging the allocation limit will have no effect since the size of the swap partition sets a much lower hard limit.

[Member mroot]

Your welcome. Let us know how you experiments go with zswap settings. I have never seen free with zswap show anything but the regular amount of memory- 2 gigs in your case. I don’t think any of the normal things we use to measure memory show the effect of zswap which is unfortunate because I would like to evaluate how well zswap is working.

Here is an analysis of the performance impact of using zswap- it’s a bit technical but you may find it useful.

https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/12/11/449

[Member rayluo]

UPDATE: Since mroot’s hint above, I’ve been experimenting zswap with its default setup (i.e. up to 20% of ram being used for zswap, using lzo compression). Due to the lack of quantitative approach to monitor how a zswap setup performs, I do not have a scientific way to judge how much (or little) it helps. Some commenters – who presumably had much more ram available – in those external links referenced by mroot’s zswap post hinted some placebo effect. LOL. In my case, it seems the thrashing would still happen BUT not as bad as before: my computer would slow down noticeably but not halt completely, so I’ve been able to at least switch to my roxterm, run htop, find and kill the offending firefox-esr process, thus bring my computer back to normal without needing a hard reboot. I did that several times today already, so that alone seems like an improvement. Presumably, the cpu busy on compressing and decompressing, is relatively more responsive than a cpu halt for I/O.

Quoted from mroot’s comment from another post:

mroot wrote:

You also might consider posting the output of inxi -Fxzto this thread or the other thread you started as it is easier for people to help you if they have an idea of what you system is since how good the advice they give is system dependent.

Of course, the other approach to improve performance is to take a hardware approach. We don’t talk about it much on this forum because we like to keep hardware for a long time (in my case sometimes way way too long lol). … Sometimes it is better to buy newer hardware even though we would like to avoid doing so.

Sure. I do have other computers that are more recent and performant. It is still a surprise to me though, that my beloved OS would potentially start thrashing at any time when/if I accidentally approaching its ram limit. In that sense, my better computer’s seemingly more reliable performance might just be a false sense of reliability. And all these were exactly the question asked in this thread’s title:

Can antiX be configured to still be responsive when running out of memory, especially if/when swap is disabled? Why wouldn’t it simply give an “Out of memory” error and continue to work?

PS: my inxi output.

$ inxi -Fxz
System:    Host: antix1 Kernel: 4.9.212-antix.1-486-smp i686 bits: 32 compiler: gcc v: 8.3.0 Desktop: IceWM 1.6.5 
           Distro: antiX-19.2_386-full Hannie Schaft 27 March 2020 base: Debian GNU/Linux 10 (buster) 
Machine:   Type: Laptop System: LENOVO product: 1709A33 v: ThinkPad X60 serial: <filter> 
           Mobo: LENOVO model: 1709A33 serial: <filter> BIOS: LENOVO v: 7BET49WW (1.09 ) date: 07/27/2006 
Battery:   ID-1: BAT0 charge: 4.7 Wh condition: 4.8/34.6 Wh (14%) model: SONY 93P5028 status: Unknown 
CPU:       Topology: Dual Core model: Intel T2300 bits: 32 type: MCP arch: M Yonah rev: 8 L2 cache: 2048 KiB 
           flags: nx pae sse sse2 sse3 bogomips: 6650 
           Speed: 1000 MHz min/max: 1000/1667 MHz Core speeds (MHz): 1: 1000 2: 1667 
Graphics:  Device-1: Intel Mobile 945GM/GMS 943/940GML Express Integrated Graphics vendor: Lenovo ThinkPad R60/T60/X60 series 
           driver: i915 v: kernel bus ID: 00:02.0 
           Display: server: X.Org 1.20.4 driver: intel unloaded: fbdev,modesetting,vesa 
           resolution: 1024x768~60Hz, 1920x1080~60Hz 
           OpenGL: renderer: Mesa DRI Intel 945GM x86/MMX/SSE2 v: 1.4 Mesa 18.3.6 direct render: Yes 
Audio:     Device-1: Intel NM10/ICH7 Family High Definition Audio vendor: Lenovo ThinkPad R60/T60/X60 series 
           driver: snd_hda_intel v: kernel bus ID: 00:1b.0 
           Sound Server: ALSA v: k4.9.212-antix.1-486-smp 
Network:   Device-1: Intel 82573L Gigabit Ethernet vendor: Lenovo ThinkPad X60/X60s driver: e1000e v: 3.2.6-k port: 2000 
           bus ID: 02:00.0 
           IF: eth0 state: up speed: 100 Mbps duplex: full mac: <filter> 
           Device-2: Intel PRO/Wireless 3945ABG [Golan] Network driver: iwl3945 v: in-tree:s port: 2000 bus ID: 03:00.0 
           IF: wlan0 state: up mac: <filter> 
           IF-ID-1: irda0 state: down mac: <filter> 
Drives:    Local Storage: total: 63.10 GiB used: 52.66 GiB (83.4%) 
           ID-1: /dev/sda vendor: Hitachi model: HTS541060G9SA00 size: 55.89 GiB 
           ID-2: /dev/sdb type: USB vendor: Toshiba model: MSFT NORB size: 4.00 GiB 
           ID-3: /dev/sdc type: USB vendor: Toshiba model: MSFT NORB size: 3.22 GiB 
Partition: ID-1: / size: 1.54 GiB used: 666.9 MiB (42.2%) fs: overlay source: ERR-102 
           ID-2: swap-1 size: 256.0 MiB used: 252.6 MiB (98.7%) fs: swap dev: /dev/sda6 
Sensors:   System Temperatures: cpu: 80.0 C mobo: 68.0 C 
           Fan Speeds (RPM): fan-1: 2818 
Info:      Processes: 175 Uptime: 2d 18h 31m Memory: 1.96 GiB used: 711.4 MiB (35.5%) Init: SysVinit runlevel: 5 Compilers: 
           gcc: 8.3.0 Shell: bash v: 5.0.3 inxi: 3.0.36

[Member rayluo]

mroot wrote:

Yes the setting of the zswap allocation to 100% is too good to be true. You have to remember that compressed ram is slower and it also results in increased cpu load

I mean to say, it is probably not even about zswap is slower and consumes cpu. I suspect that, ram and zswap are different in probably the same way that ram and normal swap are different, and again it is not about speed. Specifically, in a system with 2 gig ram, and 20% of them (i.e. 0.4 gig) are used as zswap, the OS might consider there is only 1.6 gig ram available, and start swapping out pages when the memory consumption is approaching the 1.6 gig threshold. If I understand correctly, zswap is a cache to swap, thus somewhat transparent to OS. The OS does NOT see and operate as if it has 2.4 gig ram. So, setting the zswap allocation to 100% might end up badly (I may still try it though). All that being said, I found no proof to my hypothesis. The output of free still shows not 1.6 gig, not 2.4 gig, but still 2 gig ram in my computer.

mroot wrote:

https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/vm/zswap.html

Thanks VERY MUCH for this! It contains much more official information! I learn from it that we can change those parameters at run-time! Theoretically, it would become much easier to experiment, although I would have to learn that debugfs thing first.

PS: I’ll keep this thread generic to zswap. And I’ll follow up with my specific performance topic in the other thread.

[Member mroot]

Yes the setting of the zswap allocation to 100% is too good to be true. You have to remember that compressed ram is slower and it also results in increased cpu load since every compression/decompression operation is done by the cpu. I think zswap works best when you have a fast cpu and little ram since the trade off is going to be worthwhile since cpu performance loss is not critical in this case. It also would work well with a slow cpu that has many cores which is typical of servers and that seems to be what zswap was designed for in the first place.

As far as applications- it should be good for servers or web surfing but I would imagine it would be a poor choice for gaming since cpu load is constant and pretty high. I am not sure how the system “sees” normal ram and compressed ram but it appears to me that the system sees compressed ram as regular ram that is”slow”.

Having said this you could set the allocation to 100% and then heavily load the system and see how it works. Loading a 100 tabs in firefox for example might be a good way to test it.

As for monitoring zswap the only reference I have seen is that debugfs can be used to get information about the size of the storage pool and how much is stored in it as well as other stats. I am not familar with debugfs so I really can’t help you there. I don’t know of anything like htop that can monitor zswap either but it might exist. debugfs is mentioned at the bottom of the page in the link below.

https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/vm/zswap.html

I have never worked with z3fold and I don’t know what tradeoffs that might involve. I am hesitant to make changes like that if I don’t know what the trade offs are. I think if you don’t understand the trade offs you are better off staying with default settings since the person who set the defaults should have a better ability to pick good values. I have changed compression to lz4 since it’s faster. I have also altered the allocation percentage but that is it as far as modifications I have done.

You also might consider posting the output of inxi -Fxzto this thread or the other thread you started as it is easier for people to help you if they have an idea of what you system is since how good the advice they give is system dependent.

Of course, the other approach to improve performance is to take a hardware approach. We don’t talk about it much on this forum because we like to keep hardware for a long time (in my case sometimes way way too long lol). But if you can add ram you should consider doing so. Prices for a small ssd have dropped considerably and also would be a good option especially since your having a thrashing problem. I broke down and bought one myself to extend the usable life of my system. Sequential read/writes are greater than 500 Mb/s so you do really notice the difference during boot and when opening a large application. Remember though all hardware has a finite useful life and at some point you will need to replace it with newer hardware. Sometimes it is better to buy newer hardware even though we would like to avoid doing so.

• This reply was modified 2 years, 11 months ago by mroot.

[Member rayluo]

mroot wrote:

A comparison of lz4 and lzo speeds

https://github.com/lz4/lz4

lz4 is much much faster in decompression and also quite a bit faster in compression

compression ratio for both is about 2.1

Thanks very much for this detailed info about LZ4 vs LZO! Good to know!

That being said, I did not feel slow experience during my first full day with zswap via LZO, even when comparing to the previous no-swap experience. And, those quantified result “LZO decompression speed 860 MB/s (less than LZ4’s 4970 MB/s)” might partially explain it: you see, my 2 gig ram computer allocates only a small portion (default is 20%) to be used as zswap. So, each time something needs to be decompressed from zswap, it is likely <860 MB anyway, and it would take less than 1 second.

mroot wrote:

So for a 2 gig ram system if you set the zswap allocation of ram to 50% you essentially end up with a 3 gig ram system although the zswap portion will run at slower speeds due to the time requirements for compression and decompression.

Do you have a source on this one? It sounds too good to be true. Say, set zswap allocation to 100% and end up with 4 gig ram. 🙂

I would assume normal ram and zswap “pool” are not interchangeable, so a 2 gig ram system with 1 gig allocated to zswap might end up with only 1 gig ram performed as normal ram. But again, that’s my hypothesis only.

mroot wrote:

It also appears to be dynamic in the sense zswap used ram starts at zero and grows to the allocation limit as needed. In other words if your using 2 gig or less no zswap is used and all the ram is “regular” and has normal speed.

Good to know. I did not notice that in your 3rd document. It also mentions a “zswap.zpool=z3fold” thing which sounds also significant.

By the way, do you know whether there is a way to monitor how well a zswap performs? All the normal “free”, “htop”, etc. do not seem to be aware of the zswap existence.

[Member mroot]

A comparison of lz4 and lzo speeds

https://github.com/lz4/lz4

lz4 is much much faster in decompression and also quite a bit faster in compression

compression ratio for both is about 2.1

So for a 2 gig ram system if you set the zswap allocation of ram to 50% you essentially end up with a 3 gig ram system although the zswap portion will run at slower speeds due to the time requirements for compression and decompression. It also appears to be dynamic in the sense zswap used ram starts at zero and grows to the allocation limit as needed. In other words if your using 2 gig or less no zswap is used and all the ram is “regular” and has normal speed.

[Member Thalassius]

Latest version (19), fully updated, no repos change (neither adding, nor removing). Icewm, with Rox.
Maybe it happened because of the update?
Now I can recall, that before updating, I changed my login manager, because I had some problems with Slim and I replaced it with GDM.
Maybe this is the root of the problem (although I didn’t notice it at the time (yesterday, before updating)).
Anyway! I can restore an image (that I made with Clonezilla), to see if this is the case.

>inxi -Fxz
System: Host: PC Kernel: 4.9.212-antix.1-amd64-smp x86_64 bits: 64 compiler: gcc v: 8.3.0 Desktop: IceWM 1.6.6
Distro: antiX-19.2_x64-full Hannie Schaft 27 March 2020 base: Debian GNU/Linux 10 (buster)
Machine: Type: Desktop System: ASUS product: All Series v: N/A serial: <filter>
Mobo: ASUSTeK model: AM1M-A v: Rev X.0x serial: <filter> BIOS: American Megatrends v: 1501 date: 04/01/2016
CPU: Topology: Quad Core model: AMD Athlon 5350 APU with Radeon R3 bits: 64 type: MCP arch: Jaguar rev: 1
L2 cache: 2048 KiB
flags: avx lm nx pae sse sse2 sse3 sse4_1 sse4_2 sse4a ssse3 svm bogomips: 16369
Speed: 800 MHz min/max: 800/2050 MHz Core speeds (MHz): 1: 800 2: 800 3: 800 4: 800
Graphics: Device-1: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD/ATI] Kabini [Radeon HD 8400 / R3 Series] vendor: ASUSTeK driver: radeon
v: kernel bus ID: 00:01.0
Display: x11 server: X.Org 1.20.4 driver: ati,radeon unloaded: fbdev,modesetting,vesa
resolution: 1360x768_60.00~60Hz
OpenGL: renderer: AMD KABINI (DRM 2.49.0 4.9.212-antix.1-amd64-smp LLVM 7.0.1) v: 4.5 Mesa 18.3.6
direct render: Yes
Audio: Device-1: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD/ATI] Kabini HDMI/DP Audio vendor: ASUSTeK driver: snd_hda_intel v: kernel
bus ID: 00:01.1
Device-2: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] FCH Azalia vendor: ASUSTeK driver: snd_hda_intel v: kernel bus ID: 00:14.2
Sound Server: ALSA v: k4.9.212-antix.1-amd64-smp
Network: Device-1: Realtek RTL8111/8168/8411 PCI Express Gigabit Ethernet vendor: ASUSTeK driver: r8169 v: 2.3LK-NAPI
port: e000 bus ID: 01:00.0
IF: eth0 state: up speed: 100 Mbps duplex: full mac: <filter>
Drives: Local Storage: total: 931.51 GiB used: 18.10 GiB (1.9%)
ID-1: /dev/sda vendor: Seagate model: ST1000DM010-2EP102 size: 931.51 GiB
Partition: ID-1: / size: 30.24 GiB used: 3.78 GiB (12.5%) fs: ext4 dev: /dev/sda6
ID-2: swap-1 size: 6.05 GiB used: 0 KiB (0.0%) fs: swap dev: /dev/sda7
Sensors: System Temperatures: cpu: 25.2 C mobo: N/A gpu: radeon temp: 24 C
Fan Speeds (RPM): cpu: 0
Info: Processes: 164 Uptime: 1m Memory: 3.31 GiB used: 280.2 MiB (8.3%) Init: SysVinit runlevel: 5 Compilers: gcc: 8.3.0
Shell: bash v: 5.0.3 inxi: 3.0.36
>

• This reply was modified 2 years, 11 months ago by Thalassius.

For the glorious men, every land is a grave.
Pericles' "Funeral Oration".

[Member rayluo]

FYI for those who happen to be using antiX liveUSB and not (yet?) use root persistence:

You do NOT need to follow step 2, 3 & 4 in the guide to enable zswap, therefore you do not need to bother with “pluma” or risk messing up with your grub (gasp!).

You can simply type that step 3 content “zswap.enabled=1 zswap.compressor=lz4” at the boot screen as your boot option, and then zswap will be enabled for the current boot session. You can then play with it. If you end up not like it, simply reboot and then everything will go back to normal, without needing to revert those settings.

Note: Actually, the “zswap.compressor=lz4” part won’t make a difference in a non-persisted live USB session, because you won’t be able to do step 5 in the guideline beforehand, unless you use root persistence. The default compression uses LZO, which is slower than LZ4, but presumably still OK.

My current system:

[sudo] password for demo: 
[    0.000000] Kernel command line: vga=791 tz=America/Los_Angeles quiet zswap.enabled=1 zswap.compressor=lz4
[    1.088586] zswap: compressor lz4 not available, using default lzo
[    1.088782] zswap: loaded using pool lzo/zbud

[Member DH001]

hello BobC

follow the command output

System:
Host: Poison Kernel: 4.9.212-antix.1-amd64-smp x86_64 bits: 64
compiler: gcc v: 8.3.0 Desktop: IceWM 1.6.6
Distro: antiX-19.2_x64-full Hannie Schaft 27 March 2020
base: Debian GNU/Linux 10 (buster)
Machine:
Type: Laptop System: Semp Toshiba Informatica Ltda product: NA 1402 v: N/A
serial: <filter>
Mobo: Semp Toshiba Informatica Ltda model: NA 1402 serial: <filter>
BIOS: American Megatrends v: 2.00 date: 03/01/2014
Battery:
ID-1: BAT0 charge: 1.1 Wh condition: 1.1/23.8 Wh (5%) model: standard
status: Full
CPU:
Topology: Dual Core model: AMD E1-2100 APU with Radeon HD Graphics
bits: 64 type: MCP arch: Jaguar rev: 1 L2 cache: 1024 KiB
flags: avx lm nx pae sse sse2 sse3 sse4_1 sse4_2 sse4a ssse3 svm
bogomips: 3992
Speed: 800 MHz min/max: 800/1000 MHz Core speeds (MHz): 1: 800 2: 800
Graphics:
Device-1: AMD Kabini [Radeon HD 8210] vendor: Holco Enterprise Co /Shuttle
driver: radeon v: kernel bus ID: 00:01.0
Display: x11 server: X.Org 1.20.4 driver: ati,radeon
unloaded: fbdev,modesetting,vesa resolution: 1366×768~60Hz
OpenGL:
renderer: AMD KABINI (DRM 2.49.0 4.9.212-antix.1-amd64-smp LLVM 7.0.1)
v: 4.5 Mesa 18.3.6 direct render: Yes
Audio:
Device-1: AMD Kabini HDMI/DP Audio vendor: Holco Enterprise Co /Shuttle
driver: snd_hda_intel v: kernel bus ID: 00:01.1
Device-2: AMD FCH Azalia vendor: Holco Enterprise Co /Shuttle
driver: snd_hda_intel v: kernel bus ID: 00:14.2
Sound Server: ALSA v: k4.9.212-antix.1-amd64-smp
Network:
Device-1: Qualcomm Atheros AR9285 Wireless Network Adapter vendor: Accton
driver: ath9k v: kernel port: f100 bus ID: 01:00.0
IF: wlan0 state: down mac: <filter>
Device-2: Realtek RTL8111/8168/8411 PCI Express Gigabit Ethernet
vendor: Holco Enterprise Co /Shuttle driver: r8169 v: 2.3LK-NAPI
port: e000 bus ID: 02:00.2
IF: eth0 state: up speed: 100 Mbps duplex: full mac: <filter>
Drives:
Local Storage: total: 465.76 GiB used: 4.55 GiB (1.0%)
ID-1: /dev/sda vendor: Seagate model: ST500LM012 HN-M500MBB
size: 465.76 GiB
Partition:
ID-1: / size: 455.45 GiB used: 4.55 GiB (1.0%) fs: ext4 dev: /dev/sda1
ID-2: swap-1 size: 2.00 GiB used: 0 KiB (0.0%) fs: swap dev: /dev/sda2
Sensors:
System Temperatures: cpu: 56.6 C mobo: N/A gpu: radeon temp: 57 C
Fan Speeds (RPM): N/A
Info:
Processes: 149 Uptime: 2h 44m Memory: 3.34 GiB used: 562.5 MiB (16.5%)
Init: SysVinit runlevel: 5 Compilers: gcc: 8.3.0 Shell: bash v: 5.0.3
inxi: 3.0.36

I really tried to change the background image through the control center ….. I put the image in the same folder as the system background images and it still didn’t work …. I don’t know what may be happening … . Thank you very much in advance