The kernel init improvements will certainly bring 15 other seconds.
Maybe some parallelisation of the sysvinit will save some time, say 5
seconds (low end estimation)
Parallelization will not help at all if you are using JFFS2. The low
level NAND driver that JFFS2 uses busy waits
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 3:41 AM, Guylhem Aznar o...@guylhem.net wrote:
Of course I do, but IMHO there are also some things that could have
been done differently.
Ah, hindsight is so easy ;-)
As Mitch's reply shows, we have been looking at the boot times and
studying any low-hanging-fruit
I will try fedora 11, if only to have a good refence point.
But since you said many of the speedups where dependant on kernel
fixes, how is 2.6.29 doing on the XO?
Could anyone using f11/2.6.29 on the XO give some feedback ?
Off the top of my head from the last time I tested it sound and
Martin Langhoff wrote:
Easily? Yeah, right.
Well, he can show us how it's done. I'll definitely be impressed :-)
My point is that, while each individual step is rather straightforward,
requiring no new technology, putting together all the pieces to
accomplish the goal
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Mitch Bradley w...@laptop.org wrote:
My point is that, while each individual step is rather straightforward,
A ton of careful detail work. As you point out, kernel, firmware and
distro hackers have been looking at this for a while, and there are no
obvious easy
I'm thinking about ext4, but I must confess that my experience with ext2
has been pretty frustrating. The ext2/3 on-disk format has sprouted many
new features over time. Supporting people who plug in disks that are
formatted with the latest fancy feature, then complain that an old
firmware
I'm not using sugar. The OLPC will be used [by doctors] to access
drug information, so I made some different choices. At the moment,
I am using a bootstrapped lenny where I removed everything I
could. No udev, no hotplug but a custom made script to provide the
firmware and do automounts,
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 5:55 AM, Mitch Bradley w...@laptop.org wrote:
18 seconds to initrd load
dominated by decompression time. Eliminate the initrd ...
I'm working on the initrd a but so tested a few things today.
Once under linux, a cold-cache read of the initrd takes ~300ms, and
the
As for speedups, I see 2 different ways :
a) using a SD with a fat partition + ext2 filesystem
b) using the nand with a fat partition + ubifs - this requires 2.6.29
which is not ready yet.
A FAT partition will not work well on the raw NAND of XO-1, because of
blocksize, erase block
Don't believe everything you read on a wiki.
OFW has included support for partitioned NAND since the first production
shipments, dating back to January 2008. The idea is to have a small
boot partition that can be in any format that OFW supports - JFFS2,
ext2, FAT, or even a .zip archive.
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 11:34 AM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
What version of XO software are you running? Have you tried SOAS or
one of the F11/rawhide test images to see if that improves speed at
all over 8.2.1?
SoaS boot on XO-1 hw is fairly slow, but as you say it has more
I'm thinking about ext4, but I must confess that my experience with ext2
has been pretty frustrating. The ext2/3 on-disk format has sprouted many
new features over time. Supporting people who plug in disks that are
formatted with the latest fancy feature, then complain that an old
Guylhem Aznar wrote:
Approx timings from pressing on the power button on my test machine
using an old 2.6.22 on a jffs2 partition
2 seconds with the screen turned off
There is very little that can be done to reduce that 2 seconds, which is
dominated by the time it takes to read the
Hi,
I'm still preparing my custom images for the Haïti project, and I am
quite disturbed by the JFFS2 boottime. From what I've read on the
wiki, JFFS2 is here only because OFW doesn't know how to use UBIFS.
I think its actually there because ubifs wasn't around when OLPC
needed to make a
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 9:46 AM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
I think its actually there because ubifs wasn't around when OLPC
needed to make a decision on filesystems. UBIFS hasn't been around
that long.
Exactly. We're very keen on hearing of people experimenting with it,
I think its actually there because ubifs wasn't around when OLPC
needed to make a decision on filesystems. UBIFS hasn't been around
that long.
Exactly. We're very keen on hearing of people experimenting with it,
reporting on performance and stability.
It will be interesting to hear whether
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 3:33 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
I'd also be interested to know what is required to add support for new
filesystems to OFW. ext4 now has the option to run without a journal
which gives it the advantage that ext2 had over ext3 with a lot of the
other
If you seriously are thinking of replacing OFW in your local OLPC
trials in order to shave five or ten seconds off the boot time, then
you have tons of talent but not much judgment -- and WAY too much time
on your hands. Don't waste your time on trivia; put your talent into
fixing some of the
From what I've read on the
wiki, JFFS2 is here only because OFW doesn't know how to use UBIFS.
Don't believe everything you read on a wiki.
As Peter Robinson says, JFFS is used because it was the only viable
alternative at the time we were doing the initial development. UBIFS
did not
Hello,
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 22:12, Mitch Bradley w...@laptop.org wrote:
Don't believe everything you read on a wiki.
OFW has included support for partitioned NAND since the first production
shipments, dating back to January 2008. The idea is to have a small
boot partition that can be in
20 matches
Mail list logo
