From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=44852 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OgiYo-0001Sp-Dv
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Aug 2010 14:19:27 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1OgiYn-0003EO-BY
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Aug 2010 14:19:26 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:40602)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1OgiYn-0003E7-33
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Aug 2010 14:19:25 -0400
Message-ID: <4C59AF26.2090102@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2010 21:19:18 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Anyone seeing huge slowdown launching qemu with
	Linux 2.6.35?
References: <4C590046.2020705@redhat.com> <4C591D48.9080301@redhat.com>
	<4C592218.3000901@redhat.com> <4C596549.1070109@codemonkey.ws>
	<20100804130709.GL10499@redhat.com>
	<4C5967D8.7080707@codemonkey.ws>
	<20100804133401.GP10499@redhat.com>
	<4C5970AC.6060105@codemonkey.ws> <4C5995B4.90505@redhat.com>
	<4C5996F4.6010205@redhat.com>
	<20100804174601.GH28523@amd.home.annexia.org>
	<E08B3D3B-75D6-4F0B-A55A-32982AB617F4@suse.de>
	<4C59AE8F.80205@codemonkey.ws>
In-Reply-To: <4C59AE8F.80205@codemonkey.ws>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Cc: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org, "Richard W.M.Jones" <rjones@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>, Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>

  On 08/04/2010 09:16 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> Why not go with 9p? That would save off even more time, as you don't 
>> have to generate an iso. You could just copy all the relevant 
>> executables into tmpfs and boot from there using your kernel and a 
>> very small (pre-built) initrd.
>
> You can't boot from 9p.
>

As Alex said, you boot from a non-100MB initrd (or cdrom) and mount the 
9pfs.

-- 
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.