On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 05:18:47PM +0100, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Oct 2019 at 11:13, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 5 Jun 2019 at 21:25, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, 5 Jun 2019 at 19:59, Steve Langasek
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Dimitri,
> > >
On Tue, 15 Oct 2019 at 11:13, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
>
> On Wed, 5 Jun 2019 at 21:25, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 5 Jun 2019 at 19:59, Steve Langasek
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Dimitri,
> > >
> > > One point here:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jun 05, 2019 at 01:15:48PM +0100, Dimitri J
On Wed, 5 Jun 2019 at 21:25, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
>
> On Wed, 5 Jun 2019 at 19:59, Steve Langasek wrote:
> >
> > Hi Dimitri,
> >
> > One point here:
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 05, 2019 at 01:15:48PM +0100, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> > > - lz4 size weight over gzip is marginal (14%) but imho wort
On Wed, 5 Jun 2019 at 19:59, Steve Langasek wrote:
>
> Hi Dimitri,
>
> One point here:
>
> On Wed, Jun 05, 2019 at 01:15:48PM +0100, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> > - lz4 size weight over gzip is marginal (14%) but imho worth the
> > improved boot time & initrd creation time
>
> A 14% increase in i
Hi Dimitri,
One point here:
On Wed, Jun 05, 2019 at 01:15:48PM +0100, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> - lz4 size weight over gzip is marginal (14%) but imho worth the
> improved boot time & initrd creation time
A 14% increase in initramfs size is NOT marginal. Since there are (and will
always be)
Hi Dimitri,
Thanks for keeping this thread alive.
On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 2:16 PM Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
>
> On Fri, 31 May 2019 at 09:13, Seth Arnold wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 11:46:57AM +0100, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> > > As if lz4 kernel & xz initrd would yield the fastes
On Fri, 31 May 2019 at 09:13, Seth Arnold wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 11:46:57AM +0100, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> > As if lz4 kernel & xz initrd would yield the fastest boot time? That
>
> I'm lacking some context here, but I think building the initrds is already
> too slow and I'm afrai
On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 11:46:57AM +0100, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> As if lz4 kernel & xz initrd would yield the fastest boot time? That
I'm lacking some context here, but I think building the initrds is already
too slow and I'm afraid xz on initrd rebuilds would be significantly
worse than lz4
Am Donnerstag, den 30.05.2019, 11:46 +0100 schrieb Dimitri John Ledkov:
> On Thu, 30 May 2019 at 11:35, Dimitri John Ledkov
> wrote:
> >
> > I see a lot of code in livecd-rootfs that tries hard to use lzma
> > compression for the initaller (first-boot) initrd.
> > On the classic, subsequent initr
On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 11:35:26AM +0100, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> I see a lot of code in livecd-rootfs that tries hard to use lzma
> compression for the initaller (first-boot) initrd.
> On the classic, subsequent initrds get rebuild as gzip, and on core
> lzma persists.
> I do wonder what comp
On Thu, 30 May 2019, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> On Thu, 30 May 2019 at 11:35, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> > On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 at 14:11, Colin Ian King
> > wrote:
> > > http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~cking/kernel-boot-speed-vs-compression.ods
> > Is the rationale for lzma installer initrds still
On Thu, 30 May 2019 at 11:35, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
>
> I see a lot of code in livecd-rootfs that tries hard to use lzma
> compression for the initaller (first-boot) initrd.
> On the classic, subsequent initrds get rebuild as gzip, and on core
> lzma persists.
> I do wonder what compression w
Hey,
On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 at 14:11, Colin Ian King wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> In a similar kind of exercise, I've been looking at the default
> compression for the kernel and how this affects boot speed.
>
> Data:
> http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~cking/kernel-boot-speed-vs-compression.ods
> (libreoffice spread
Hi,
In a similar kind of exercise, I've been looking at the default
compression for the kernel and how this affects boot speed.
Data:
http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~cking/kernel-boot-speed-vs-compression.ods
(libreoffice spread sheet)
I've tested this on a fairly speedy desktop box and it is interest
Hi Steve,
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 12:40 AM Steve Langasek
wrote:
>
> Hi Balint,
>
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 02:59:24PM +, Balint Reczey wrote:
>
> > Initramfs-tools uses gzip compression by default which served us well
> > for quite some time but LZ4 offers way faster decompression while
> >
Last night I was trying to decrypt my laptop remotely. Work well
(after some research) and so on, but the point is I put Dropbear SSH
server inside initramfs and a faster decompress would be very
welcomed.
On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 2:19 PM, Balint Reczey
wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 3:12 PM, Ju
Hi Balint,
On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 02:59:24PM +, Balint Reczey wrote:
> Initramfs-tools uses gzip compression by default which served us well
> for quite some time but LZ4 offers way faster decompression while
> making a only slightly bigger initramfs files.
When people have previously discu
On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 3:12 PM, Julian Andres Klode
wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 02:59:24PM +, Balint Reczey wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Initramfs-tools uses gzip compression by default which served us well
>> for quite some time but LZ4 offers way faster decompression while
>> making a only slig
On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 02:59:24PM +, Balint Reczey wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Initramfs-tools uses gzip compression by default which served us well
> for quite some time but LZ4 offers way faster decompression while
> making a only slightly bigger initramfs files.
>
> On my old laptop the initramfs ex
Hi,
Initramfs-tools uses gzip compression by default which served us well
for quite some time but LZ4 offers way faster decompression while
making a only slightly bigger initramfs files.
On my old laptop the initramfs extraction time decreased from ~1.2s to ~0.24s:
(with lz4)
kernel: [0.29772
20 matches
Mail list logo
