On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski
<[email protected]> wrote:
> While working on an embedded system running several big services, X-org,
> fluxbox, Qt5 etc. where the boot-time was awful, it turned out that the
> readahead implementation from systemd (the one that was nuked in 2014)
> improves the time needed to start all the programs by a few seconds.
>
> This series introduces a small (LOC < 500) readahead daemon implementation
> based on fanotify and readahead syscalls.
I am agonizing on this.
I do believe that you see some improvement in your setup.
Possibly a substantial one.
However.
There is no "standard" readahead tool which is doing this, right?
I usually accept patches to busybox tools which make them
more compatible with "standard" tools: I want to reduce
the frequency of cases where someone replaces a "standard"
tool with busybox equivalent on a working system and something
breaks.
But if everything still works, it is just slow
(example: "find -exec ... {} +" does work, it is not optimized
compared to "find -exec ... {} ;"), this does not count as breakage.
Your readahead addition does not match either of these conditions.
It is not a copy of some standard tool, and if it is missing, things
don't break, they are just slower.
How about this?
Let's accept (some of) the changes you need for your applet
to work, but you keep the applet per se out of the tree?
When a "standard" readahead tool appears in "big" distros,
we can return to this discussion.
_______________________________________________
busybox mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
