On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 08:59:51AM -0700, Frank Rowand wrote: > On 10/19/2015 5:34 AM, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
> > To be clear, I was saying that this series should NOT affect total > > boot times much. > I'm confused. If I understood correctly, improving boot time was > the key justification for accepting this patch set. For example, > from "[PATCH v7 0/20] On-demand device probing": > > I have a problem with the panel on my Tegra Chromebook taking longer > than expected to be ready during boot (Stéphane Marchesin reported what > is basically the same issue in [0]), and have looked into ordered > probing as a better way of solving this than moving nodes around in the > DT or playing with initcall levels and linking order. > > ... > > With this series I get the kernel to output to the panel in 0.5s, > instead of 2.8s. Overall boot time and time to get some individual built in component up and running aren't the same thing - what this'll do is get things up more in the link order of the leaf consumers rather than deferring those leaf consumers when their dependencies aren't ready yet. > While not as dramatic as your results, they are somewhat supportive. > What has changed your assessment that the on-demand device probing > patches will give a big boot performance increase? Do you have > new data or analysis? See above, my understanding was that the performance improvements were more around improved control/predictability/handwave of the boot ordering rather than total time.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
