[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081120214717.1a02a9af@infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 21:47:17 -0800
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To: "Peter Teoh" <htmldeveloper@...il.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Sam Ravnborg" <sam@...nborg.org>
Subject: Re: A question sort_main_extable()
On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 13:42:56 +0800
"Peter Teoh" <htmldeveloper@...il.com> wrote:
> Inside start_kernel() there is a call to sort_main_extable().
>
> void sort_extable(struct exception_table_entry *start,
> struct exception_table_entry *finish)
> {
> sort(start, finish - start, sizeof(struct
> exception_table_entry), cmp_ex, NULL);
> }
>
> With reference to
> http://tuxology.net/2008/07/08/benchmarking-boot-latency-on-x86/, I
> think it can help bootup latency (how much I got no number) if the
> sorting is done post-compilation time, instead of dynamically
> everytime the system bootup. (perhaps at the stage of modposting,
> when all the vmlinux, kernel modules objects have been generated, so
> extracting out the exceptions strings is possible?) Is this a
> possible optimization?
we used to do this but it was a pain and extremely fragile. Runtime
sorting makes it very robust at least.
The sort is really quick though; I've spent a lot of time on boot time
and this guy never showed up for me.
--
Arjan van de Ven Intel Open Source Technology Centre
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@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists