[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] sparc64: boot performance improvements
From: |
Andrei Borzenkov |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] sparc64: boot performance improvements |
Date: |
Wed, 7 Oct 2015 11:36:03 +0300 |
On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 8:39 PM, Eric Snowberg <address@hidden> wrote:
> Keep of devices open. This can save 6 - 7 seconds per open call and
> can decrease boot times from over 10 minutes to 29 seconds on
> larger SPARC systems. The open/close calls with some vendors'
> SAS controllers cause the entire card to be reinitialized after
> each close.
>
Is it necessary to close these handles before launching kernel? It
sounds like it can accumulate quite a lot of them - are there any
memory limits/restrictions? Also your patch is rather generic and so
applies to any IEEE1275 platform, I think some of them may have less
resources. Just trying to understand what run-time cost is.
> Signed-off-by: Eric Snowberg <address@hidden>
> ---
> grub-core/kern/ieee1275/ieee1275.c | 39
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/grub-core/kern/ieee1275/ieee1275.c
> b/grub-core/kern/ieee1275/ieee1275.c
> index 9821702..30f973b 100644
> --- a/grub-core/kern/ieee1275/ieee1275.c
> +++ b/grub-core/kern/ieee1275/ieee1275.c
> @@ -19,11 +19,24 @@
>
> #include <grub/ieee1275/ieee1275.h>
> #include <grub/types.h>
> +#include <grub/misc.h>
> +#include <grub/list.h>
> +#include <grub/mm.h>
>
> #define IEEE1275_PHANDLE_INVALID ((grub_ieee1275_cell_t) -1)
> #define IEEE1275_IHANDLE_INVALID ((grub_ieee1275_cell_t) 0)
> #define IEEE1275_CELL_INVALID ((grub_ieee1275_cell_t) -1)
>
> +struct grub_of_opened_device
> +{
> + struct grub_of_opened_device *next;
> + struct grub_of_opened_device **prev;
> + grub_ieee1275_ihandle_t ihandle;
> + char *path;
> +};
> +
> +static struct grub_of_opened_device *grub_of_opened_devices;
> +
>
>
> int
> @@ -452,6 +465,18 @@ grub_ieee1275_open (const char *path,
> grub_ieee1275_ihandle_t *result)
> }
> args;
>
> + struct grub_of_opened_device *dev;
> +
> + FOR_LIST_ELEMENTS(dev, grub_of_opened_devices)
> + if (grub_strcmp(dev->path, path) == 0)
> + break;
> +
> + if (dev)
> + {
> + *result = dev->ihandle;
> + return 0;
> + }
> +
> INIT_IEEE1275_COMMON (&args.common, "open", 1, 1);
> args.path = (grub_ieee1275_cell_t) path;
>
> @@ -460,6 +485,11 @@ grub_ieee1275_open (const char *path,
> grub_ieee1275_ihandle_t *result)
> *result = args.result;
> if (args.result == IEEE1275_IHANDLE_INVALID)
> return -1;
> +
> + dev = grub_zalloc(sizeof(struct grub_of_opened_device));
Error check
> + dev->path = grub_strdup(path);
Ditto
> + dev->ihandle = args.result;
> + grub_list_push(GRUB_AS_LIST_P (&grub_of_opened_devices), GRUB_AS_LIST
> (dev));
> return 0;
> }
>
> @@ -473,6 +503,15 @@ grub_ieee1275_close (grub_ieee1275_ihandle_t ihandle)
> }
> args;
>
> + struct grub_of_opened_device *dev;
> +
> + FOR_LIST_ELEMENTS(dev, grub_of_opened_devices)
> + if (dev->ihandle == ihandle)
> + break;
> +
> + if (dev)
> + return 0;
> +
How can we come here (i.e. can we get open handle without grub_ieee1275_open)?
> INIT_IEEE1275_COMMON (&args.common, "close", 1, 0);
> args.ihandle = ihandle;
>
> --
> 1.7.1
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Grub-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
- [PATCH] sparc64: boot performance improvements, Eric Snowberg, 2015/10/08
- Re: [PATCH] sparc64: boot performance improvements,
Andrei Borzenkov <=
- Re: [PATCH] sparc64: boot performance improvements, Eric Snowberg, 2015/10/08
- Re: [PATCH] sparc64: boot performance improvements, Andrei Borzenkov, 2015/10/09
- Re: [PATCH] sparc64: boot performance improvements, Eric Snowberg, 2015/10/09
- Re: [PATCH] sparc64: boot performance improvements, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko, 2015/10/10
- Re: [PATCH] sparc64: boot performance improvements, Eric Snowberg, 2015/10/15
- Re: [PATCH] sparc64: boot performance improvements, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko, 2015/10/25
- Re: [PATCH] sparc64: boot performance improvements, Eric Snowberg, 2015/10/27
- Re: [PATCH] sparc64: boot performance improvements, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko, 2015/10/28
Re: [PATCH] sparc64: boot performance improvements, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko, 2015/10/10