On Wed, 9 Jul 2008 21:04:37 +0200 Sander van Grieken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> babbled:
> If breaking boot from SD support only gains us 6 seconds I'd vote no. > > > of course we will look at the rest of userspace, but that doesn't mean we > > should just ignore the kernel. > > I dont know the motorola rokr but a large part of the speed increase is > probably because a lot of the base services and the GUI are thrown into one > large statically linked binary, a static /dev, no dbus.. (correct me if I'm > wrong) yes. it likely does.. but it manage a kernel AND userspace boot in less time than our kernel just gets to starting init. on a significantly lower-end piece of hardware too. pretty embarrassing. > > > I guess I failed to check if you did it before I started doing it months > > > ago and found it was nice. I explained a very strong reason ---> > > > > i know you do it. this is one of the reasons our production systems will > > never improve - you never feel the pain of them as you always are doing > > something different. if you had to suffer from the same boot time as the > > rest of us every day... many times a day, you'd be thinking differently > > about the sdio driver built into the kernel - along with everything else. > > i'm just trying to point out that we should be optimising for the > > production use-case, not for a debug/kernel hacker mode. if we can get sdio > > up in much less time, then it's not much of a harm to still be there. > > A 'normal' user will probably seldom reboot. I assume most of the time they > will suspend/resume, So is boot time really such a big issue? you'll be booting a lot if you travel on planes. -- Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
