<div dir="ltr">I'm pretty sure they are, they are part of the Xilinx Zynq SoC platform, from their specs 32 KB Level 1 4-way set-associative instruction and data caches (independent for each CPU)<div style="font-size:13.3px;font-family:sans-serif">512 KB 8-way set-associative Level 2 cache (shared between the CPUs) </div><div style="font-size:13.3px;font-family:sans-serif">Good idea on disabling a core, this could then prove/disprove my first theory, a bit of googling tells me that there's a Kernel boot arg 'nosmp', I'll give this a try. </div><div style="font-size:13.3px;font-family:sans-serif">Cheers, Martin. </div> </div><div class="gmail_extra"> <div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 3:33 PM, Umut Tezduyar Lindskog <<a href="mailto:umut@tezduyar.com" target="_blank">umut@tezduyar.com</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 8:51 PM, Martin Townsend <<a href="mailto:mtownsend1973@gmail.com">mtownsend1973@gmail.com</a>> wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for your reply. I wouldn't really call this system stripped down, it > has an nginx webserver, DHCP server, postgresql-server, sftp server, a few > mono (C#) daemons running, loads quite a few kernel modules during boot, > dbus, sshd, avahi, and a bunch of other stuff I can't quite remember. I > would imagine glibc will be a tiny portion of what gets loaded during boot. > I have another arm system which has a similar boot time with systemd, it's > only a single cortex A9 core, it's running a newer 4.1 kernel with a new > version of systemd as it's built with the Jethro version of Yocto so > probably a newer version of glibc and this doesn't speed up when using > bootchart and in fact slows down slightly (which is what I would expect). > So my current thinking is that it's either be down to the fact that it's a > dual core and only one core is being used during boot unless a fork/execl > occurs? Or it's down to the newer kernel/systemd/glibc or some other > component. Are you sure both cores have the same speed and same size of L1 data&instruction cache? You could try to force the OS to run systemd on the first core by A) make the second one unavailable B) play with control groups and pin systemd to first core. Umut <div><div class="h5"> > > Is there anyway of seeing what the CPU usage for each core is for systemd on > boot without using bootchart then I can rule in/out the first idea. > > Many Thanks, > Martin. > > > On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 6:52 PM, Kok, Auke-jan H <<a href="mailto:auke-jan.h.kok@intel.com">auke-jan.h.kok@intel.com</a>> > wrote: >> >> On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 7:15 AM, Martin Townsend >> <<a href="mailto:mtownsend1973@gmail.com">mtownsend1973@gmail.com</a>> wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > I'm new to systemd and have just enabled it for my Xilinx based dual >> > core >> > cortex A-9 platform. The linux system is built using Yocto (Fido >> > branch) >> > which is using version 219 of systemd. >> > >> > The main reason for moving over to systemd was to see if we could >> > improve >> > boot times and the good news was that by just moving over to systemd we >> > halved the boot time. So I read that I could analyse the boot times in >> > detail using bootchart so I set init=/..../bootchart in my kernel >> > command >> > line and was really suprised to see my boot time halved again. Thinking >> > some weird caching must have occurred on the first boot I reverted back >> > to >> > normal systemd boot and boot time jumped back to normal (around 17/18 >> > seconds), putting bootchart back in again reduced it to ~9/10 seconds. >> > >> > So I created my own init using bootchart as a template that just slept >> > for >> > 20 seconds using nanosleep and this also had the same effect of speeding >> > up >> > the boot time. >> > >> > So the only difference I can see is that the kernel is not starting >> > /sbin/init -> /lib/systemd/systemd directly but via another program that >> > is >> > performing a fork and then in the parent an execl to run >> > /lib/systemd/systemd. What I would really like to understand is why it >> > runs >> > faster when started this way? >> >> >> systemd-bootchart is a dynamically linked binary. In order for it to >> run, it needs to dynamically link and load much of glibc into memory. >> >> If your system is really stripped down, then the portion of data >> that's loaded from disk that is coming from glibc is relatively large, >> as compared to the rest of the system. In an absolute minimal system, >> I expect it to be well over 75% of the total data loaded from disk. >> >> It seems in your system, glibc is about 50% of the stuff that needs to >> be paged in from disk, hence, by starting systemd-bootchart before >> systemd, you've "removed" 50% of the total data to be loaded from the >> vision of bootchart, since, bootchart cannot start logging data until >> it's loaded all those glibc bits. >> >> Ultimately, your system isn't likely booting faster, you're just >> forcing it to load glibc before systemd starts. >> >> systemd-analyze may actually be a much better way of looking at the >> problem: it reports CLOCK_MONOTONIC timestamps for the various parts >> involved, including, possibly, firmware, kernel time, etc.. In >> conjunction with bootchart, this should give a full picture. >> >> Auke > > > </div></div>> _______________________________________________ > systemd-devel mailing list > <a href="mailto:systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org">systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org</a> > <a href="https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel</a> > </blockquote></div> </div>