From: Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@googlemail.com>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-embedded@vger.kernel.org, Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de>,
Martin Mueller <martin@pfump.org>
Subject: Re: Boot time: Kernel start parallelization issue?
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2011 08:33:54 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D329F62.1010505@googlemail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4D31C8C5.6010306@googlemail.com>
On 15.01.2011 17:18, Dirk Behme wrote:
> On 15.01.2011 16:41, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>> On 1/15/2011 12:40 AM, Dirk Behme wrote:
>>>
>>> There are some reports [1] [2] looking at the boot time of embedded
>>> (ARM?) systems using initcall debug [3]. Both reports seem to show
>>> that they have issues with the start up sequence of the kernel being
>>> completely single-threaded. In [2] Greg mentions that on a x86 box
>>> multi-threads are happening and that there he doesn't see this
>>> issue. On the other hand, both reports mention Arjan's async
>>> initcall patches [4] to help against the issue. I.e. introducing
>>> some parallelization (on ARM) does help, too.
>>>
>>> With this, I wonder
>>>
>>> - if anybody faces similar issues with single-threaded only kernel
>>> start on embedded (ARM?) systems? Or if this is known? Or if there
>>> are fixes for this?
>>>
>>> - if we somehow should try to 're-activate' Arjan's async initcall
>>> patches?
>>
>> those patches are obsoleted by the merged async_schedule() calls.
>
> Any link (patch name, git link) to be able to check for
> async_schedule() calls?
Do you talk about
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=22a9d645677feefd402befd02edd59b122289ef1
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=4ace92fc112c6069b4fcb95a31d3142d4a43ff2a
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=793180570ff2530d133343ceea85648de5f01b02
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=f29d3b23238e1955a8094e038c72546e99308e61
http://lwn.net/Articles/314808/
merged with 2.6.29?
With a recent .37 kernel the usage of async_schedule() seems to be
implemented for
./drivers/acpi/battery.c
./drivers/s390/block/dasd.c
./drivers/base/power/main.c
./drivers/ata/libata-core.c
./drivers/scsi/sd.c
./drivers/md/raid5.c
With this, on an embedded system using none of this, the completely
single-threaded start up reported in [2] seems to be reasonable, then?
This would mean that to improve the issues reported in [2],
async_schedule() has to be implemented for the sub systems used,
there, too? I.e. the USB init?
>> what kernel are you seeing issues on?
>
> [1] talks about 2.6.28, [2] talks about 2.6.34.
Thanks
Dirk
> [1]
> http://www.lindusembedded.com/blog/2010/06/02/measuring-the-boot-time-of-an-embedded-linux-device/
>
>
> [2] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.usb.general/41181 (mainly the
> last mail of this thread:
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.usb.general/41619)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-01-16 7:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-01-15 8:40 Boot time: Kernel start parallelization issue? Dirk Behme
2011-01-15 15:41 ` Arjan van de Ven
2011-01-15 16:18 ` Dirk Behme
2011-01-16 7:33 ` Dirk Behme [this message]
2011-01-17 0:13 ` Arjan van de Ven
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4D329F62.1010505@googlemail.com \
--to=dirk.behme@googlemail.com \
--cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@suse.de \
--cc=linux-embedded@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin@pfump.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).