Re: 2.6.25 slow boot/reboot

Sergio Luis
2008-04-30T01:05:55Z

Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> [ 1.375711] Serial: 8250/16550 driver $Revision: 1.90 $ 4 ports, IRQ
>> sharing enabled
>> [ 4.399907] floppy0: no floppy controllers found
>>
>> a 90-second delay is not what's happening, or at least, not what the
>> kernel is seeing. So my bet would be something clock-related. Probably
>> the system's clocksource is not running the time correctly, which is
>> causing system events to be delayed. I fail to see, however, how does
>> the patch you bisected to influences this. Ingo, do you have any idea?
>
> the first thing to check, does latest x86.git work fine:
>

nope, it doesn't work fine, but gives me the same issue (I had to apply
the scsi patch in http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/4/27/309 in order to make
it boot, though).

> http://people.redhat.com/mingo/x86.git/README
>
> ? We've got fixes queued up - in particular one could result in 'slow'
> systems by virtue of denying an ioremap():
>
> Subject: revert: "x86: ioremap(), extend check to all RAM pages"
>
> maybe the bisection went haywire.
>

I tried re-bisecting using now 2.6.25 as my initial good kernel, but in
the 2nd or 3r iteration I start having compilation problems like such as

--
ld:fs:afs/cell.o: file format not recognized; treating as linker script
ld:fs/afs/cell.o:1: syntax error

The same problem happens with fs/autofs/inode.o and crypto/hmac.o
--

and it stopped the bisection process from going forward.

I am using binutils 2.17.50.0.17 (slackware 12 here) and also tried the
latest binutils cvs, but it gives me the same error there.

Any suggestions?
thanks,
-sergio

> Or the secondary core booted up in such a sucky way that it causes such
> massive slowdowns? Perhaps we are flooding the system with local APIC
> timer interrupts or other interrupts?
>
> Ingo