From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Tue Jan 12 16:49:35 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A98C3A80B0B for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 16:49:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from oliver.pinter@hardenedbsd.org) Received: from mail-wm0-x230.google.com (mail-wm0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3E832125D for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 16:49:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from oliver.pinter@hardenedbsd.org) Received: by mail-wm0-x230.google.com with SMTP id f206so260649289wmf.0 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 08:49:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hardenedbsd-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=LTeslCMuC7pIKFBsznSDwFEgi3ssL2bgF0Ip7FhUq4Y=; b=BZ/Vgl+alJQVD0sDWcOF7U4X6/4T7WrNpJaBAxfS2mb1flIxa6QC0bV+lea1kUc9UO rWDrbUvUSoFBfxw8ZjK/E2iH6tHXqomqFo3Gt2TV4tyYBUvNaZB/XW8L+Pkri1hm3yA+ WSokTONcVgat6KokX/ZZ+2KiFIwzyPX8J9gUma8KOml8Nd3qYBQ5pgPQRJmkJfYR7Nbd Z8AlA+hzz8Dm4q57RPVFJVia6kWXcmT8imSrqE6730gihFPAaLClo5osy2JS0skTaSO1 DTAg/DCB0fo4I75ykLsBlkgGT3n30JQVFf0l1+rc7iAbfzt1RQcVt11KSvp7hULmjuCK SYVg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=LTeslCMuC7pIKFBsznSDwFEgi3ssL2bgF0Ip7FhUq4Y=; b=ipwllblz6Op8H9KkPNUgKifyfSyIM+IkCTezl/o3QXmEKrgoiPSabPdwByv870NMTn 13jxQ2YdGjgHJjw79OAZjMD+WoZHyuKMA0KVXrjRdMzITmBafTtxxNz0iydT7iefeHZ7 JpdyN92AywSDeQwFCSGxPMR6+W9/NsK7gtYW3Yt5jLoOMPTtxh6K194G7NC7gh6GtpFP JmNwt4WL5O75EfdjxukEcP+x+rGVQGEzBe02yIGDPoOxcH+EazBn4YXXRmhyXxZVQrEl 7JuLRWNNDjTyxKrf7PeMFlejem7hYDLfklPJrq8KY5y/+4F18nmQSWIijBNCt9x2cUOY NN+A== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnV84L6R8iTA8jB1vTVXasEsVsjgTLnifaBHmVTjt3tKFDq9lDk8GNCYB0jSY+euCyiPdAFKCj2US+v1i0T44fG5aQ4Td2A+GEeQwo8lzif2zff1Oo= MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.28.57.214 with SMTP id g205mr10384591wma.20.1452617373744; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 08:49:33 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.194.85.167 with HTTP; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 08:49:33 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20151224181308.GZ3625@kib.kiev.ua> References: <20151224173146.H8562@sola.nimnet.asn.au> <567BA5BB.4020304@rvijay.me> <1450970960.25138.242.camel@freebsd.org> <20151224181308.GZ3625@kib.kiev.ua> Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 17:49:33 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Need help with New Build -- Skylake From: Oliver Pinter To: Konstantin Belousov Cc: Ian Lepore , Vijay Rajah , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 16:49:35 -0000 On 12/24/15, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 08:29:20AM -0700, Ian Lepore wrote: >> We had exactly this symptom -- long delay with spincursor before >> loading the kernel -- on arm systems when we first enabled forth in >> loader. The problem turned out to be the fact that loader was running >> with instruction and data caches disabled, and it took about 90-100 >> seconds to parse the 547 lines of text (almost all useless) in >> /boot/defaults/loader.conf. We stripped that file down to the dozen or >> so lines that actually needed to be there and booting became much >> faster. Eventually we got the caches enabled in the prior-stage >> bootloader and it became really fast. > > It is highly unlikely that caches are the source of the slowness. On > x86, we rely on the firmware (BIOS or EFI) to properly configure both > DRAM controllers and caches. More, Intel considers the corresponding > controllers configuration recipes as highly secret and, even for BIOS > vendors, Intel provides the binary blob of code which does the config > magic, instead of the documentation. > > That said, loader runs in the unpaged protected mode but reflects BIOS > calls into the real mode. Quite possible, either the real mode is > slow on SkyLakes, or even more possible, the switch between real and > protected mode is slow, or the protected mode without paging enabled is > slow. Or might be the PCH lacks the ISA timer. Seem like the issue is affects the legacy boot mode, in UEFI mode the system boots blazingly fast. When I have more time, I try to figure out what's the problem behind this issue. > > A developer needs the real machine to diagnose the cause. >