linux-kernel - Re: [patch 1/3] fastboot: Create a "asynchronous" initlevel

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1216483685.3978.161.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Sat, 19 Jul 2008 09:08:05 -0700
From:	Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>
To:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu
Subject: Re: [patch 1/3] fastboot: Create a "asynchronous" initlevel

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..

Daniel

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/