[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Fwd: Re: film at 11: kernel update breaks udev.



Harald Hoyer (harald redhat com) said: 
> What makes you think so?
>
> Is the udevd binary slower?
>
> Is selinux making it slower?
>
> Are the default rules in
> /etc/udev/rules.d/05-udev-early.rules
> /etc/udev/rules.d/50-udev.rules
> /etc/udev/rules.d/95-pam-console.rules
> slow?
>
> What is upstream? udev-113/etc/udev/redhat or udev-113/etc/udev/suse ????

I've never noticed it being 100x slower. However, there are a couple of
cases for improvement:

- make_extra_nodes in start_udev is relatively slow. The more we can avoid
  using this, the better
- 60-libsane.rules takes measureable time in udevd just to *parse*, even though
  they're skipped on bootup. As part of deprecating/removing pam_console
  (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/FeatureRemovePAMConsole), these
  can hopefully go away
- the bluetooth rules could use some skip/goto
- is check_cdrom.sh really needed?

But still, this only shaves startup by about a second or so.

Bill


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]