Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Speed up boot!
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Other Things Gentoo
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
syadnom
Guru
Guru


Joined: 09 May 2002
Posts: 531

PostPosted: Thu Sep 02, 2004 8:25 pm    Post subject: hmm Reply with quote

the only thing i can think of is that maybee your kernel image isnt being bziped up.

is your kernel called bzImage? or something else like vmlinux?

im talking about when it is in the /usr/src/linux/arch/i386/boot/*kernel*

not how you name it in /boot
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
fallingcow
n00b
n00b


Joined: 11 Apr 2004
Posts: 31

PostPosted: Thu Sep 02, 2004 9:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah, I do:

make clean bzImage modules modules_install

with a 2.6 kernel, then

cp arch/i386/boot/bzImage /boot/bzImage

Which is the same thing I do on all my other systems.
_________________
Did you exchange a walk on part in the war for the lead role in a cage?

-Pink Floyd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
syadnom
Guru
Guru


Joined: 09 May 2002
Posts: 531

PostPosted: Fri Sep 03, 2004 5:50 am    Post subject: well Reply with quote

well, my thought was that maybe your kernel image wasn't compressed so it took longer to read, but that doesn't seem to be the case

can you post your grub.conf/menu.lst, or lilo.conf file here?

your kernel may be trying to figure out bios information, you may want to UNCHECK the option for probing the BIOS for boot devices if you are using that. just a thought
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
neuron
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 28 May 2002
Posts: 2371

PostPosted: Sat Sep 11, 2004 4:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

use grub instead of lilo, problem solved, same thing happens on my laptop ;)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gentree
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 01 Jul 2003
Posts: 5350
Location: France, Old Europe

PostPosted: Fri Sep 17, 2004 6:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

FWIW my AthlonXP@2.2GHz :

30s to grub menu: OS indep mainly slow due to adaptec SCSI card loading its BIOS.


grub to login (console) 40s , all partitions checked every time.


after login to xfce4 desktop. 6s


Its not that fast because I've never felt the need to tune it nor is it a pb because I only power on once !

I've completely weaned myself off windows headaches and dont even have it on the box.

And if you really must compare you should set XP to verify all your filing systems at every boot. I dont see anyone's figures for a scandisk because the system crashed and had to be power-cycled.

I like to see the boot sequence output, it allows me to see if there are any problems and because I am reading it I dont feel like I'm waiting. After that going through the KDE powerup does annoy me , that's why I use a lightwieght desktop that comes up in 6 seconds.

For the moment I have emerged kdebase -kdeedu for a few apps like k3b that I lauch from a console if I need them, I will probably bin it all soon because most buring I do from command line anyway.

But that's what Gentoo is all about. Choise.


8)
_________________
Linux, because I'd rather own a free OS than steal one that's not worth paying for.
Gentoo because I'm a masochist
AthlonXP-M on A7N8X. Portage ~x86
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
syadnom
Guru
Guru


Joined: 09 May 2002
Posts: 531

PostPosted: Fri Sep 17, 2004 8:36 pm    Post subject: susp Reply with quote

i'm planning to work on some suspend to disk stuff. for me, i need to have all input and mass storage devices other than the OS filesystems as modules, i have found that resuming a system gives a bit of trouble to plug'n'pray devices.

so my next task is:

modularize my kernel for p'n'p devices
add scripts to unload all p'n' p modules on suspend, and load all those modules again after successfull resume
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
glen666
n00b
n00b


Joined: 06 Apr 2004
Posts: 9

PostPosted: Sun Sep 19, 2004 8:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

what about 'readahead' technique redhat uses?

Code:

fedora-core-2 box# head -40 /etc/init.d/readahead
#!/bin/sh
#
# readahead:    Prereads programs required for startup into memory
#
# chkconfig: 5 96 99
# description:  This service causes the programs used during startup \
#               to be loaded into memory before they are needed,\
#               thus improving startup performance
#
#

# Sanity checks.
[ -x /usr/sbin/readahead ] || exit 0

# Source function library.
. /etc/rc.d/init.d/functions

start() {
    echo -n $"Starting background readahead: "
    /usr/sbin/readahead `cat /etc/readahead.files` &
}

stop() {
   /bin/true
}


it's contained in kernel-utils-2.4-9.1.131 package there.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
syadnom
Guru
Guru


Joined: 09 May 2002
Posts: 531

PostPosted: Sun Sep 19, 2004 9:01 pm    Post subject: glen6 Reply with quote

glen666, have you installed this? if so please post a howto:, if you post that as well an I will take a crack at it.

seems like a good idea.

do you think it loads a ramdisk? or just loads it into main memory?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
glen666
n00b
n00b


Joined: 06 Apr 2004
Posts: 9

PostPosted: Mon Sep 20, 2004 7:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

yes. i've installed, but i havent measured any effect it does give. because it needs list of files to readahead to memory. it's kernel syscall they use. the program is pretty simple: get list of filenames, call readahead(2) on each of them.

the list of programs for redhat is different than gentoo.
ok. i've opened bug, https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=64724
i'll post source code and filelist there.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
syadnom
Guru
Guru


Joined: 09 May 2002
Posts: 531

PostPosted: Mon Sep 20, 2004 8:05 am    Post subject: looks Reply with quote

looks pretty simple....

how would we go about picking files to pre-load??
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
glen666
n00b
n00b


Joined: 06 Apr 2004
Posts: 9

PostPosted: Mon Sep 20, 2004 8:20 am    Post subject: Re: looks Reply with quote

syadnom wrote:
looks pretty simple....

how would we go about picking files to pre-load??


i presume, use the strace sniffing (see the bug), and see what it want's to load. and then compose the list. i guess, must be, in the list, are libc and bash.

perhaps building the list too big will cause older entries wiped from memory, if the system is running low on fs cache. so it shouldn't be very big list.

altought, most systems have at least 256Mb ram, so it's not big deal acutally. i have system up 13hrs. and it still has 75mb in fs-cache:

Code:

$ free
             total       used       free     shared    buffers     cached
Mem:        354168     338164      16004          0      53644      75636
-/+ buffers/cache:     208884     145284
Swap:       506008       3528     502480


that's from 2.6.8-ck7, kde is also up'n' running.

i wonder, is there possible to peek, what files are in current fs cache? it would be helpful in this situation.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gen_oxigen
n00b
n00b


Joined: 15 Sep 2004
Posts: 26

PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2004 4:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

So why don't you try icewm instead of kde? Abd at the same time why don't you use XP instead of linux? I tell you why I have changed to linux from XP. Simple. It is much better. And I do not give a ... if I have to wait 10 sec. longer for a much better performancy and a much better OS!!!!!

I had to say it. I'm sorry!
_________________
__________________
Jesus is Black. She is!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
syadnom
Guru
Guru


Joined: 09 May 2002
Posts: 531

PostPosted: Wed Sep 22, 2004 10:03 am    Post subject: well. Reply with quote

EVERYONE has said that, and its CRAP, use linux on a laptop, where bootspeed really counts!! tote your laptop into a meeting and wait 2 minutes to boot, SUCKS!!

icewm SUCKS! KDE is a full DE, and icewm is a window manager. no clipboard, no integration, NOT WHAT I NEED. and guess what, i seem to believe that i should get a bit more than a close widget after a minute and a half of bootup!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
glen666
n00b
n00b


Joined: 06 Apr 2004
Posts: 9

PostPosted: Wed Sep 22, 2004 10:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

syadnom, did you try the readahead?
for me, i almost did not hear hdd activity when started kde.
also i used different kernel, so i'm not very sure did it have any change.

i've added small howto to bugs.gentoo.org too.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
syadnom
Guru
Guru


Joined: 09 May 2002
Posts: 531

PostPosted: Wed Sep 22, 2004 3:58 pm    Post subject: nope Reply with quote

have not tried it yet, was setting up my gentooMyth box :)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Remenic
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 10 May 2003
Posts: 76

PostPosted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 7:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have used the readahead method glen suggested. I used glen's readahead.files (removed some files that I didn't have) but there's still a LOT of disk activity when start KDE. I've made readahead.c more verbose, and it shows that it's pre-loading the KDE that are listed. I'm not sure why it's not working for me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LucaSpiller
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Posts: 188
Location: Censorship Land (aka England)

PostPosted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 9:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

For me Gentoo takes about 30 secs from the boot loader to the kdm login screen - so far I haven't got many servers (sshd is about it), but I also have attempted any optimisation yet (apart from the usual Gentoo ones).

Windows ME, on the same machine, but a slower hard disk, takes about 45 secs to get to the login screen. Then it takes about another 20 before you can do anything (for some reason there is a big gap between when explorer has loaded and the stuff set to run at startup starts).
_________________
:: Luca :: Mac Fag :: Original Macbook, 2g RAM :: Closet Linux user (seasoned with salt and pepper) :: C2D E4400 @ 2ghz, 4g RAM (only 3.2g detected under 64bit...), Nvidia 9600GSO ::
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
syadnom
Guru
Guru


Joined: 09 May 2002
Posts: 531

PostPosted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 10:49 pm    Post subject: will Reply with quote

will be working on the readahead oh monday and tuesday(days off), just ditched mythtv, NUV video format is crap, pure crap and until the myth crew gets a different format it will be crap.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
VinzC
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 17 Apr 2004
Posts: 5061
Location: Dark side of the mood

PostPosted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 6:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DarkStalker wrote:
Honestly, is your time so precious that you can't handle waiting 30 seconds to boot up a machine?


Absolutely. And what's the point in comparing both Losedows and Linux when both architectures don't share the same principles? I mean when you gain control in Linux everything is ready and fully loaded whereas in *dows you stil have to wait till it's calmed down to start working.

It's also pointless to compare a laptop and a desktop or whatever machine against the other. The best comparison is made against the same machine, dual booting. But yet one has to be as knowledgable on both platform to be able to get the same level of performance.

I'd say comparing boot speed would be significant if, on the same machine:
    * dual boot exists
    * both systems are optimized to boot as fast as possible.

Then it would mean Linux is able to boot faster than XP or the contrary. But again, it might depend on the platform or hardware... When you start picking holes in delays that short it's time you asked yourself the good questions: what's really important?

This is why I usually don't care of how long I have to wait before I can use my computer :-)
_________________
Gentoo addict: tomorrow I quit, I promise!... Just one more emerge...
1739!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Trevoke
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 04 Sep 2004
Posts: 4099
Location: NY, NY

PostPosted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 7:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why don't you use the HOWTO : DO_NOT_COMPILE with kdebase, kde, all that? You'll get your full desktop environment with only what you want.. should speed it up.


And here's https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=231170 a tip on how to speed up boot!

And if you prelink.. From the Gentoo page...
Quote:
KDE's loading time can be greatly reduced after prelinking. If you inform KDE that it has been prelinked it will disable the loading of kdeinit (as it isn't required anymore) which speeds up KDE even more.

Set KDE_IS_PRELINKED="true" in /etc/env.d/99kde-env to inform KDE about the prelinking.

_________________
Votre moment detente
What is the nature of conflict?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
syadnom
Guru
Guru


Joined: 09 May 2002
Posts: 531

PostPosted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 10:30 pm    Post subject: trev Reply with quote

trevoke,
pre-link is only a minor improvement, i shaved off about 1 second with prelink. also, KDE only loads what you see and use, it doesn't automatically load the callender or kdevelop, so the DO_NOT_COMPILE option only saves some disk space and install time, not anything for bootspeed.

a couple options:

1) new bootlevel, an identicle clone of 'default' but with anything you would like to load AFTER the gettys are up and X is starting, this was you can strip down default to the minimum and still get things started up

this shaves a few seconds off as it allows programs to load in the background when X is starting, X usually is using more CPU time than disk time starting up so it helps a bit

2) using the fedora preload script(search the forums) the idea is that iif you start loading everything you need from startup right off, then init will be reading stuff out of ram, and this would allow more sequential and steady disk read, with less time seeking around AKA less wasted time.

This does help with another couple seconds

3) TRY THIS, set up your system just how you want it, make sure you have suspend to disk setup. Make a extra swap partition for your suspend and disable all BUT that extra swap partition for 1 boot, after that you will set up fstab to ignore that swap partition. now, on that first boot, your going to get right where you want to be on every boot, and software suspend your machine. make sure that you have a kernel line for the resume partition.

the point:
a)you setup the way you want your machine to be right after boot, just like a normal bootup
b)you have a swap partition that will not be overwritten, and can be used for software suspend over and over again.
c)you get to effectively skip init, boot goes kernel->loadswap->desktop

i have done this and i'm at an 'EXPERIMENTAL" stage of developing the technique, but it does work if you have a descently fast drive. i noticed a %25 improvement on my 4200RPM notebook and almost %60 better on a 7200RPM desktop.
also, your CPU speed is not really important here, its your disk I/O system. also, if the swap image could be compressed then more CPU would be used but less of the I/O which is the slow point. a 1.5Ghz machine can decompress just about any format FASTER than it can be read from disk.(dont believe me? try it with a ramdisk vs a hard disk decompressing a tarball or rar)

other than these ideas, i don't see how bootspeed can be improved much.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
missyvortex
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 16 Feb 2004
Posts: 127

PostPosted: Sun Oct 03, 2004 10:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

DarkStalker wrote:
Honestly, is your time so precious that you can't handle waiting 30 seconds to boot up a machine?


could quote steve jobs here - he apparently once presurized his programmers into getting the mac to boot faster by pointing out that 30 seconds to millions of users would add up to a lifetime and that were saving lives! bizarre but 30 seconds is 1 year almost per every million users that is wasted sitting there doing nothing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
syadnom
Guru
Guru


Joined: 09 May 2002
Posts: 531

PostPosted: Sun Oct 03, 2004 11:15 am    Post subject: consider this Reply with quote

if your car took 2 minutes to start, would you have the attitude that its OK because you could drive it for hours and hours wihtout having to start it again? no, because time is important, when you get to your machine, you want it to be ready to go really quickly. just like MANY people don't leave their car running when they are not using it as it is a total waste of resources, many people don't leave their computer on.

i'm just plain sick of the 'arguement' that boot times don't matter cause you should only boot when your machine crashes or you change hardware, because its just an assinin concept for many many people.

why don't you just leave your shower running so that its hot and ready for you, even though you only use it 15minutes per day. or is it ok you have to turn the shower on before breakfast and take you shower after breakfast because it takes so long to get the water running or warm.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
VinzC
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 17 Apr 2004
Posts: 5061
Location: Dark side of the mood

PostPosted: Mon Oct 04, 2004 11:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

missyvortex wrote:
could quote steve jobs here - he apparently once presurized his programmers into getting the mac to boot faster by pointing out that 30 seconds to millions of users would add up to a lifetime and that were saving lives! bizarre but 30 seconds is 1 year almost per every million users that is wasted sitting there doing nothing


Also, everybody spends almost 15 years in his/her life just sleeping at night. Should it be considered a waste of resources too?... :wink:
_________________
Gentoo addict: tomorrow I quit, I promise!... Just one more emerge...
1739!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
syadnom
Guru
Guru


Joined: 09 May 2002
Posts: 531

PostPosted: Mon Oct 04, 2004 6:16 pm    Post subject: well Reply with quote

no, sleeping is awesome, infact, the whole point of being sucessful and living a good life is simply to improve your ability to have a good nights sleep, because sleep IS the meaning of life!

well, i do really like to sleep :)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Other Things Gentoo All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 4 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum