Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755508AbYGSQO2 (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Jul 2008 12:14:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753293AbYGSQOU (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Jul 2008 12:14:20 -0400 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:58383 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752919AbYGSQOU (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Jul 2008 12:14:20 -0400 Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2008 09:14:20 -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: <20080719091420.14127633@infradead.org> In-Reply-To: <1216483685.3978.161.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> <20080719083532.21c9a43e@infradead.org> <1216483685.3978.161.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: 1744 Lines: 43 On Sat, 19 Jul 2008 09:08:05 -0700 Daniel Walker wrote: > On Sat, 2008-07-19 at 08:35 -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > > > 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) > > > > How did you measure the boot time? I didn't notice any infrastructure > for that in the patches.. > well.. we already have the printk-timestamps and the initcall_debug also timestamps individual initcalls... the way I measured it was based on the printk timestamp of the last thing the kernel did before giving control to init. (which was a printk I added just for this purpose) (and the bootchart tool also confirmed the same data, based on system uptime) fwiw I have more patches coming to help boottime once these are done, but these 3 were self contained and ready for posting, the others need some more cleanup first. -- 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/