Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756106AbYGSPfn (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Jul 2008 11:35:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754877AbYGSPfg (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Jul 2008 11:35:36 -0400 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:54072 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754824AbYGSPff (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Jul 2008 11:35:35 -0400 Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2008 08:35:32 -0700 From: Arjan van de Ven To: Daniel Walker Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu Subject: Re: [patch 1/3] fastboot: Create a "asynchronous" initlevel Message-ID: <20080719083532.21c9a43e@infradead.org> In-Reply-To: <1216481066.3978.159.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20080718151524.5ef9e29b@infradead.org> <20080718151608.46dc17c0@infradead.org> <1216430540.3978.137.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080718204406.7426e8fe@infradead.org> <1216440697.3978.142.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080718222014.34754e7b@infradead.org> <1216481066.3978.159.camel@localhost.localdomain> Organization: Intel X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.5.0 (GTK+ 2.12.11; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by casper.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1518 Lines: 36 On Sat, 19 Jul 2008 08:24:26 -0700 Daniel Walker wrote: > On Fri, 2008-07-18 at 22:20 -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > > > > btw it's also about learning to crawl before learning to walk, > > before learning to run. THis stuff is tricky and there are many > > hidden problems; I rather start SIMPLE and understandably right, I > > don't want to go "full parallel" now (or maybe ever, no idea, we > > need to learn from this step first). Btw: I suspect the biggest > > gain comes from the first step or two.. after that you soon get > > diminishing returns... > > > > Ok .. I'm not trying to rush you .. With that said, the increased > number of threads seems like a natural direction to take.. I would > assume the returns would diminish depending on the number of threads > per the hardware.. For instance , your addition of one thread might > even harm the boot time on some single core embedded systems .. well it still improves the cases where msleep() happens... even on single core. (fwiw the test machine I reported numbers from is single core, albeit with hyperthreading) -- If you want to reach me at my work email, use arjan@linux.intel.com For development, discussion and tips for power savings, visit http://www.lesswatts.org -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/