I think it should be safe to disable all of them, although I haven't
actually tried that myself. I think that's how Alpha is usually used,
but I'll let the experts comment on that. If you needed to start
services like an ftp server as a workload then you might want to leave
those specific scripts alone.
Gabe
Quoting Joel Hestness <[email protected]>:
Hi Gabe and Ali,
Thanks for the leads! I'd love to get my hands on the x86-specific
patches if you can find them.
I have been booting to shell with m5term so far, and you're right, I need to
disable the init services. Is it safe to disable all of them, or all under
certain runlevels?
Thanks,
Joel
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 10:00 PM, Ali Saidi <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Joel,
The patches do two things to improve the simulation speed. First, they
calculate what loopsperjiffy would be given the processor frequency and
write that value into the global variable. You can get around this by just
passing the lpj=XXXXXX boot argument to the kernel, so this change isn't
particularly needed anymore. The other thing they do is re-write the __delay
to use an pseudo instruction (a made up opcode that does simulator specific
functionality) that encodes how long the processor should sleep for. Thus
when udelay() and nsdelay() are used in the kernel, the cpu model can just
jump to the right time (either the end of the delay or an interrupt).
The various other patches provide additional pseudo instructions, but none
of them relate to performance.
Ali
On Jun 9, 2010, at 4:09 PM, Joel Hestness wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> I am interested in helping develop X86_FS boot up and testing.
> Under X86_FS, I have been able to boot a couple different versions of
the Linux kernel (v2.6.22.9 and v2.6.28.4), but the bring up requires more
than 12 hours of simulation time. I am hoping to reduce the boot time to
make it more usable.
> I recall that the M5 patches for alpha-linux play some tricks to speed
bootup, so I tried building an x86 kernel v2.6.27 with the patches. It
looks like many of the patches are specific to ALPHA, so (maybe
unsurprisingly) I encountered errors quickly in the build.
> I am wondering if anyone is currently working on this, or if I could
get some pointers on where to dig in.
> Thank you,
> Joel
>
>
> --
> Joel Hestness
> PhD Student, Computer Architecture
> Dept. of Computer Science, University of Texas - Austin
> http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~hestness
> _______________________________________________
> m5-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
_______________________________________________
m5-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
--
Joel Hestness
PhD Student, Computer Architecture
Dept. of Computer Science, University of Texas - Austin
http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~hestness
_______________________________________________
m5-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
