Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 20:48:13 +0000 From: Steven Hartland <killing@multiplay.co.uk> To: Colin Percival <cperciva@tarsnap.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RFC: Hiding per-CPU kernel output behind bootverbose Message-ID: <CAHEMsqYSDYHUJhxmkU_U1hZZLSUwCAV6%2BK_v22kSoDn0NHfxxQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <01000162df15f856-1e5d2641-2a72-4250-8d8e-adcd47bc5db4-000000@email.amazonses.com> References: <01000162df15f856-1e5d2641-2a72-4250-8d8e-adcd47bc5db4-000000@email.amazonses.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Sounds good to me, I think we could actually benefit from even quieter modes if I=E2=80=99m honest. On Thu, 19 Apr 2018 at 21:09, Colin Percival <cperciva@tarsnap.com> wrote: > On large systems (e.g., EC2's x1e.32xlarge instance type, with 128 vCPUs) > the boot time console output contains a large number of lines of the form= s > > SMP: AP CPU #N Launched! > cpuN: <ACPI CPU> on acpi0 > estN: <Enhanced SpeedStep Frequency Control> on cpuN > > Having 128 almost-identical lines of output doesn't seem very useful, and > it actually has a nontrivial impact on the time spent booting. > > Does anyone mind if I hide these by default, having them only show up if > boot verbosity is requested? > > -- > Colin Percival > Security Officer Emeritus, FreeBSD | The power to serve > Founder, Tarsnap | www.tarsnap.com | Online backups for the truly paranoi= d > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org= " >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAHEMsqYSDYHUJhxmkU_U1hZZLSUwCAV6%2BK_v22kSoDn0NHfxxQ>