On Tue, 17 May 2011 21:18:26 +0200, Dirk Behme
wrote:
> On 17.05.2011 05:52, Rusty Russell wrote:
> > On Mon, 16 May 2011 22:23:40 +0200, Alessio Igor Bogani
> > wrote:
> >> This work was supported by a hardware donation from the CE Linux Forum.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Alessio Igor Bogani
> >>
On Tue, 17 May 2011 16:22:41 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 10:56:03PM +0200, Alessio Igor Bogani wrote:
> > This work was supported by a hardware donation from the CE Linux Forum.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Alessio Igor Bogani
> > ---
>
> That's nice, but _why_ do this change? Wh
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 02:10:15PM -0700, Tim Bird wrote:
> >>> And why do people overly care for the load time?
> >>
> >> To reduce overall boot time.
> >
> > To reduce it even more, build the modules into the kernel :)
>
> That's what I do most of the time. For some projects,
> it is useful to
On 05/18/2011 12:21 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 10:00:12AM -0700, Tim Bird wrote:
>> Carmelo Amoroso reported some good performance gains
>> in this presentation:
>> http://elinux.org/images/1/18/C_AMOROSO_Fast_lkm_loader_ELC-E_2009.pdf
>> (See slide 22).
>>
>> He doesn't report th
The function is_exported() with its helper function lookup_symbol() are used to
verify if a provided symbol is effectively exported by the kernel or by the
modules. Now that both have their symbols sorted we can replace a linear search
with a binary search which provide a considerably speed-up.
Th
Dear Mr. Kroah-Hartman,
2011/5/18 Greg KH :
[...]
> Care to resend it without all the stuff above so someone (Rusty I guess)
> can apply it?
Sure! It'll follow in few minutes.
Thank you very much!
Ciao,
Alessio
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-embedded" in
the
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 10:00:12AM -0700, Tim Bird wrote:
> On 05/18/2011 12:54 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 04:33:07PM -0700, Tim Bird wrote:
> >> That said, I can answer Greg's question. This is to speed up
> >> the symbol resolution on module loading. The last numbe
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 08:55:25PM +0200, Alessio Igor Bogani wrote:
> Dear Mr. Bird, Dear Mr. Kroah-Hartman,
>
> Sorry for my very bad English.
>
> 2011/5/18 Tim Bird :
> [...]
> > Alessio - do you have any timings you can share for the speedup?
>
> You can find a little benchmark using ftrace
Dear Mr. Bird, Dear Mr. Kroah-Hartman,
Sorry for my very bad English.
2011/5/18 Tim Bird :
[...]
> Alessio - do you have any timings you can share for the speedup?
You can find a little benchmark using ftrace at end of this email:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/4/5/341
> On 05/17/2011 04:22 PM, Gre
On 05/18/2011 12:54 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 04:33:07PM -0700, Tim Bird wrote:
>> That said, I can answer Greg's question. This is to speed up
>> the symbol resolution on module loading. The last numbers I
>> saw showed a reduction of about 15-20% for the module load
On 17.05.2011 22:56, Alessio Igor Bogani wrote:
This work was supported by a hardware donation from the CE Linux Forum.
Signed-off-by: Alessio Igor Bogani
---
kernel/module.c |7 ++-
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/module.c b/kernel/module.c
index
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 04:33:07PM -0700, Tim Bird wrote:
> That said, I can answer Greg's question. This is to speed up
> the symbol resolution on module loading. The last numbers I
> saw showed a reduction of about 15-20% for the module load
> time, for large-ish modules. Of course this is hig
12 matches
Mail list logo
