Thread: Booting Linux Fast

slax linux i found cool cos will load from cd (instructions on there site for customising to HD use) but the idea of using a cd does mean that it has a small space

yes but thats more than enough space for a linux install. Of course a slax cd won't have your frontend on it so you should just make your own live cd. However, I don't see how a CD can make linux start up quicker.

its not faster BECAUSE its on a CD, it loads faster because it is cut down to be tiny in disc space, so has very few features, so with nothing to load its quick to load.

it will have your front end on there cos you can add anything you like to it.

and like i said you can run it from your HD or USB or even CF if your system supports it

i cant remember the stats but i think the complete slax os on a CD is around the 60mb, so there is plent of room for whatever else you need

[QUOTE=cbergeron]
Remove all the "printk()'s" from the kernel source. This eliminates all the startup text, but you can still debug via serial.
/QUOTE]

You can accomplish the same by appending "silent" as a boot option. It skips over any printks, but you have the same problem that you do with removing them from the source. Any panics will never show up and you still are stuck with the printfs.

[QUOTE=fearthepenguin]

Originally Posted by cbergeron

Remove all the "printk()'s" from the kernel source. This eliminates all the startup text, but you can still debug via serial.
/QUOTE]

You can accomplish the same by appending "silent" as a boot option. It skips over any printks, but you have the same problem that you do with removing them from the source. Any panics will never show up and you still are stuck with the printfs.

Yes, I agree. Using silent is MUCH better then just clobbering all of your kernel messages

You can accomplish the same by appending "silent" as a boot option. It skips over any printks, but you have the same problem that you do with removing them from the source. Any panics will never show up and you still are stuck with the printfs.

You are absolutely correct, K panic's won't show up. However, in our environment we measure kernel performance in milliseconds (more precisely - microseconds). Tacking 'silent' to the kernel as a boot option still requires processing and every printk/silent flag evaluation still requires _at least_ two or three extra CPU cycles.

Our kernel boots as rapidly as a cell-phone. We didn't achieve a consumer-grade kernel without intimiately knowing it's internals.

For the record, we don't recommend removing printk's for a development system. However, if your system is stable and production ready, removing them DOES help.

Much like horsepower, every little bit adds up.



Cheers,
CB

Cool, I didn't think about that. It probably a better idea to wrap #ifdefs around them atleast. This way if something freakishly bad happens you can restore your messages by recompiling the kernel.