On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 12:31 AM, Rick Mann wrote:
> Awesome, thanks for the links!
btw, beyond u-boot's falcon mode. There is a lot of room for
improvement on the kernel side.
see:
https://lwn.net/Articles/645808/
Regards,
--
Robert Nelson
https://rcn-ee.com/
--
For more options, visit h
Awesome, thanks for the links!
> On Jun 7, 2015, at 21:58 , William Hermans wrote:
>
> And as Robert Nelson points out towards the end of that post. there is also
> Falcon mode for uboot. Pretty much skips most of uboot, and goes straight
> into loading the kernel. How much time that will actu
And as Robert Nelson points out towards the end of that post. there is also
Falcon mode for uboot. Pretty much skips most of uboot, and goes straight
into loading the kernel. How much time that will actually save ? dunno . . .
On Sun, Jun 7, 2015 at 9:51 PM, William Hermans wrote:
>
> https://gr
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/beagleboard/Qt$20boot/beagleboard/iOOM7utU1Nw/L67y8Qi7r9wJ
The video I was thinking of was actually an imx6 board. But liyaoshi says
that 1 s boot times should be achievable. Scroll down to liyaoshi's posts
an see what he / she recommends for faster boots
That's interesting. Unfortunately, while my primary app is a C program I wrote,
I also (currently) rely on node.js to provide a configuration server. This
server does NOT have to be up and running immediately.
However, an upcoming enhancement to my app will have it fetching data from the
networ
Rick, If we're talking uboot-> executable, no Linux, you can probably do
the same. One of the beagleboard.org google group community "liyoshi" I
think had a Qt app booting in under 5 seconds too I think. It's been a
while since I've seen that post, and do not remember what topic is was
under . . .
> On Jun 7, 2015, at 16:54 , rh_ wrote:
>
> Wouldn't you want to know how much time it takes before deciding
> to reduce the time it takes.
Hence my question.
> How long is your "power on to my C user code running"?
Forever. This is an embedded device that I'd like to be operational from
pow
Thanks, William. Yeah, it could be from hibernate, but I don't think so:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Fjfqz6FxC8
And it looks like it's 3 seconds power-to-app. I can probably live with that.
> On Jun 7, 2015, at 15:38 , William Hermans wrote:
>
> I would think hard coding into the
I would think hard coding into the main DTB would add time. A couple ways
to think about it would be you *could* theoretically in userspace after the
board has booted. Then systemd is supposed to be better at parallel tasks
when booting compared to SYSV. Which again *could* mean that keeping things
I'm working on reducing the boot time (power on to my C user code running) as
much as possible. I've seen demonstrations of an RPi booting in under 1 second.
Does anyone have any idea how much overhead is introduced by the DTB
processing? If I were to remove the DTB support in a custom kernel, a
10 matches
Mail list logo
