Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2018 13:28:44 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> Cc: "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: RFC: Hiding per-CPU kernel output behind bootverbose Message-ID: <CANCZdfrW2NMZ22-q8E6Arg-mEFkGU-ZjZ45wsgLeBhEOakddCA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4be440e4-e70f-3652-e755-ed2d924ff3d2@freebsd.org> References: <01000162df15f856-1e5d2641-2a72-4250-8d8e-adcd47bc5db4-000000@email.amazonses.com> <CAHEMsqYSDYHUJhxmkU_U1hZZLSUwCAV6%2BK_v22kSoDn0NHfxxQ@mail.gmail.com> <4be440e4-e70f-3652-e755-ed2d924ff3d2@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 12:11 AM, Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> wrote: > On 20/4/18 4:48 am, Steven Hartland wrote: > >> 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 >>> forms >>> >>> 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, a= nd >>> 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 i= f >>> boot verbosity is requested? >>> >> https://reviews.freebsd.org/D15153 implements that for everything except the CPU launched. Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CANCZdfrW2NMZ22-q8E6Arg-mEFkGU-ZjZ45wsgLeBhEOakddCA>