[laptop-discuss] Re: Re: Re: Making Solaris Boot Faster

[Jürgen Keil]

> Is there a business case requirement for saving one second?

I guess no.

But it saves one second *per* uhci controller.  I think Intel
ICH8 chipsets now have 5 uhci controllers (for a total of
ten usb host ports), so tuning uhci attach wait to 0
would save five seconds of boot time on such a system
with ICH8 chipset.
 
> Since there is an obvious risk there, it is not good
> to move without clear requirement.

If there really are systems out there that need the delay,
they could change it back to the one second delay using
a line in /etc/system (set uhci:uhci_attach_wait = 1;).


> > The one second uhci attach wait appears to be a workaround for some
> > unspecified NCR system:
> >
> > #ifndef __sparc
> >         /*
> >          * On NCR system,  the driver seen  failure of some commands
> >          * while booting. This delay mysteriously solved the problem.
> >          */
> >         delay(drv_usectohz(uhci_attach_wait*1000000));
> > #endif
> >
> >
> > It wouldn't surprise me if one of more of the following applies:
> >
> > - that NCR system is unable to run modern Solaris x86 releases
> >   (in that case: why does Nevada still need the workaround?)
> >
> > - lots of changes in the Solaris USB drivers in the last couple of years
> >   have made the uhci/NCR workaround obsolete
> >
> >
> >
> > Maybe Nevada should just change the default uhci_attach_wait to 
> > 0 seconds (instead of one second), and see if we get any bug reports
> > on broken S-x86 nevada uhci support?
 
 
This message posted from opensolaris.org