Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 28 May 2009 02:14:46 -0700 (PDT) | From | Martin Knoblauch <> | Subject | Re: Analyzed/Solved/Bisected: Booting 2.6.30-rc2-git7 very slow |
| |
------------------------------------------------------ Martin Knoblauch email: k n o b i AT knobisoft DOT de www: http://www.knobisoft.de
----- Original Message ---- > From: Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@vrfy.org> > To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> > Cc: Martin Knoblauch <knobi@knobisoft.de>; efault@gmx.de; viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk; rjw@sisk.pl; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; shemminger@vyatta.com; jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org; matthew@wil.cx; mike.miller@hp.com > Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 10:56:45 PM > Subject: Re: Analyzed/Solved/Bisected: Booting 2.6.30-rc2-git7 very slow > > On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 22:31, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Wed, 27 May 2009 04:25:57 -0700 (PDT) > > Martin Knoblauch wrote: > > > >> FWIW, I compiled the CCISS driver into the kernel. This makes the second > "/sys" line in /proc/mounts go away, dmesg attached. But does it prove anything? > The initialization of the CCISS hardware now happens about 2 seconds earlier in > the bootup sequence. Does this hint to a problem with CCISS, or just confirms > that the whole issue is really timing dependent? Anyway, I add Mike to CC. > >> > > > > It seems that the PCI change caused timing changes which triggered a > > udev/sysfs/whatever problem, which manifests as the duplicated > > /proc/mounts entry to turn up. > > > > What we don't know (afaik) is why the kernel permitted two entries in > > /proc/mounts. That might be a bug. > > > > It could be that if dual /proc/mounts problem gets fixed, everything > > works OK - by intent or by accident, the userspace startup scripts may > > then work acceptably. > > > > I think Al asked you a few questions around the behaviour of mount(8) > > and the mount syscall, so we could delve further into why /proc/mounts > > is getting mucked up. Did you end up running those tests? >
I do not recall any questions from Al. If he asked, I am pretty sure I answered :-)
> I expect the duplicate comes from a left-over mount in initramfs which > isn't a duplicate in the sense of a bug in vfs or mount or anything. I > guess, it is just still mounted in the initial kernel rootfs, below > the root from the disk. It could be that a umount from initramfs did > go wrong because of a changed timing. >
This is what I suspect as well. I know for sure that the first sysfs-line in /proc/mounts
| none /sys sysfs rw 0 0
is already there (2.6.29-rc1 and up) when entering startup-skripts. It is supposed to be unmounted before, but something seems to prevent it. I have idea how to capture debug output from the initrd/init script :-(
Cheers Martin
| |