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

Re: Init : someone could comment this ?



Alan Cox wrote:
On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 05:35:33AM +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:
AFAIK, busybox still forks whereever a regular POSIX shell forks, so if the amount of forks is the problem, AFAICT busybox will resolve absolutely nothing.

Fork should be pretty cheap - although that depends how much memory is unshared
by each of the resulting tasks. A smaller cleaner shell such as rc (which was
designed for this job in plan 9) or ash might well perform better. I'm dubious
it would be a big difference but someone can bench it.

If a unix-like system can't fork/exec at a rate suitable to handle starting it's initial processes you should throw the whole system out and start over, because it will be useless even after you get it running. I think the real problem you need to solve is the number of file opens that happen between boot up and the end of the init script processing. This: http://kernelslacker.livejournal.com/35270.html and the presentation on the topic at Oscon looked pretty horrible and won't be fixed by using a dumber shell to parse the scripts. And note that the suggestion to break out lines of configurations into individual files for easier programmatic editing just compounds this already serious problem.

--
  Les Mikesell
   lesmikesell gmail com


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