Re: slower initcalls in -next

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Daniel Walker
Date: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 - 8:24 am

On Wed, 2008-08-20 at 09:58 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:


I didn't realize it till later , but the list is a little misleading ..
Those times are a mix of execution, and blocking.. I think the top one
(49 seconds!) was blocked most of the time, since ub_init() doesn't look
very complex. I'm not sure if it what it was blocked on, or why ..

Daniel

--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
slower initcalls in -next, Daniel Walker, (Tue Aug 19, 1:51 pm)
Re: slower initcalls in -next, Takashi Iwai, (Wed Aug 20, 12:58 am)
Re: slower initcalls in -next, Daniel Walker, (Wed Aug 20, 8:24 am)