Boot time excessive for clean SuSE 9.0 install
My tale of woe I upgraded from SuSE 8.2 to 9.0 (workstation desktop) and found my boot time went from 1-2 minutes to 2-3 minutes, and produced a lot of boot time error messages. I had upgraded (vice clean install) because I had gotten my Matrox G450 card working with dual monitors on 8.2 and didn't want to hassle getting them to work with 9.0. Well I got tired of the long boot and worrying about all the error messages, and did a clean install of 9.0. Boot times went to over 10 minutes. Window2K Pro boots from Grub to Logon in about 60 seconds (of course after logon there's about 2-3 minutes before you can actually do anything). WOW. So I went through the documentation, mailing lists archives, net search and by doing a few things got the boot time to just over seven minutes (GRUB boot selection to KDE logon). I even asked SuSE. This pretty much eliminates SuSE desktop from any kind of useful work for me, especially with the other problems I'm having with 9.0. I don't think there is anything unusual about the hardware, except possibly Plantronics USB headset and the dual monitor Matrox - and even possibly the HP scanner or AMD processor. I've used SuSE 7.2,7.3,8.0 and 8.2 on the same system without any boot time problems. I've also got three SuSE Intel servers and one old Redhat server running - but this workstation/Desktop stuff has me going crazy. I would really, really like to get a workstation/Linux desktop up to where I could rely on it for useful work - but at this point I feel SuSE is not going to be able to support that (at least for me). Too much stuff doesn't work. I would appreciate any ideas and suggestions about this. Larry Johnson, KeepItSimpleEngineering,Inc. P.S. Some good things about 9.0 - Grub works great, and the Matrox DualHead/dual monitors work great after you get them configured correctly.
On Sat, 2004-07-24 at 12:56 -0700, Larry Johnson KISE wrote:
Boot times went to over 10 minutes.
Yikes! If you monitor the boot messages on the console, is there any particular point where it hangs, or is the slowness evenly distributed, so to speak? One idea is that it has something to do with ACPI, since that changed dramatically in 9.0. Have you tried booting with acpi=off or acpi=pci as a kernel parameter?
On Sat, 2004-07-24 at 12:56 -0700, Larry Johnson KISE wrote:
Boot times went to over 10 minutes.
Yikes!
If you monitor the boot messages on the console, is there any particular point where it hangs, or is the slowness evenly distributed, so to speak?
Yes, at the end of a line: Sound driver: ....usb-audio
One idea is that it has something to do with ACPI, since that changed dramatically in 9.0. Have you tried booting with acpi=off or acpi=pci as a kernel parameter?
Setting acpi=off in the Grub kernel options mad a big difference. Thanks Anders. Larry Johnson, KeepItSimpleEngineering,Inc.
On Sat, 2004-07-24 at 12:56 -0700, Larry Johnson KISE wrote:
Boot times went to over 10 minutes.
Yikes!
If you monitor the boot messages on the console, is there any particular point where it hangs, or is the slowness evenly distributed, so to speak?
Yes, at the end of a line: Sound driver: ....usb-audio
One idea is that it has something to do with ACPI, since that changed dramatically in 9.0. Have you tried booting with acpi=off or acpi=pci as a kernel parameter?
Setting acpi=off in the Grub kernel options made a big difference.
Thanks Anders.
Oops, Yikes & Worse Turns out that a warm reboot reduces the time to logon, not acpi=off. (doesn't need to reload drivers?) So I bit the bullet and did a fresh and complete installation. Now my boot times are ***9 minutes***, consistently. I set HOTPLUG_DEBUG to verbose and see a lot of time and waits with hotplug messages in SYSLOG. So I tried NOHOTPLUG=YES as a boot parameter, and then NOHOTPLUG=YES and NOCOLDPLUG=YES, but boot is still hanging in the same places - it seems that these boot parameters don't work in 9.0. ----- I'm about ready to conclude that the SuSE desktop is not ready for prime time, and that SuSE doesn't care. I know that's harsh - but skimpy and apparently inaccurate documentation along with too much stuff that does not work like HP printers/Scanners (only works under root)/PC Webcams and meaningless error messages/unstable applications/too much system maintenance have tolerance limits in users, especially me. Too much time, not enough results. I short, I'm bummed about it. Larry Johnson, KeepItSimpleEngineering,Inc.
Larry Johnson KISE wrote:
So I tried NOHOTPLUG=YES as a boot parameter, and then NOHOTPLUG=YES and NOCOLDPLUG=YES, but boot is still hanging in the same places - it seems that these boot parameters don't work in 9.0.
-----
I'm about ready to conclude that the SuSE desktop is not ready for prime time, and that SuSE doesn't care. I know that's harsh - but skimpy and apparently inaccurate documentation along with too much stuff that does not work like HP printers/Scanners (only works under root)/PC Webcams and meaningless error messages/unstable applications/too much system maintenance have tolerance limits in users, especially me. Too much time, not enough results.
I short, I'm bummed about it. Larry Johnson, KeepItSimpleEngineering,Inc.
Why are you judging Suse on an *old* version, that seems to make very little good technological sense. You need to run 9.1 with all of the updates before making any valid judgments about whether or not "SuSE" is "ready for prime time". I have to say that the powers-that-be continue to insist upon Microsoft products where I work and we suffer *daily* troubles with lost files, crashing windows, incompatibilities, unnecessary virus vulnerabilities, constant needs for "critical security updates", etc. In the real world there is no perfect desktop but I have chosen Suse 9.1 and run it on my notebook at home and at work -- interfaced with the lesser Microsoft machines -- because I trust it for security and stability that no version of MS Windows has ever offered. IMHO, YMMV ... ;-) -- Thanks! & 73, doc kd4e West Central Florida 100% Linux. Suse 9.1 Drake, Hallicrafters, Heathkit, TenTec, Yaesu Radio Life: http://www.gospelcom.net/twr/ Linux-Incompatible hardware is defective! USA Pres. Election 2004: http://www.rnc.org/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Well after looking at the syslog with full debugging turned on, it's clear that hotplugging is the culprit. So I disable the four USB 1.1 ports from the motherboard BIOS, and now I get a 4 minute boot, down from 9 minutes. So the I disable USB hotplugging with SuSE configuration to avoid my USB 2.0 ports, and now I get a 1 minute boot. I review the HOTPLUG docs in SuSE 9.0 - practically zilch. I go to hotplugging at sourceforge, http://sourceforge.net/projects/linux-hotplug/ and about the time the SuSE scripts were written signed off, there are threads about all kinds of problems with USB and delays - some from SuSE. There is a bug reported 25 July 2004 about this same issue. (997624) This explains the NOHOTPLUG and NOCOLDPLUG options in SuSE 9.1. So I say that SuSE sold a distribution with a buggy boot scheme, didn't provide a workable alternative, that they were aware of it, and are unwilling to acknowledge it. I would love to be wrong about this. Apparently (unverified) the use of multiple & mixed versions of USB hubs triggers the problem - standard features of my Gigabyte GA-7VRXP Rev 2.0 motherboard. There are some indications that the problem also exists in SuSE 9.1 as well as other distributions that use hotplugging. I have spent quite a bit of time discovering this unpleasant fact, and I am very unhappy about it. Pressure from users (as well as the Linux community) has moved MS to improve their products and practices, perhaps it could work for SuSE/Novell too. Larry Johnson, KeepItSimpleEngineering,Inc.
-----Original Message----- From: doc [mailto:kd4e@verizon.net] Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2004 18:29 To: suse-linux-e@suse.com Subject: Re: [SLE] Boot time excessive for clean SuSE 9.0 install
So I tried NOHOTPLUG=YES as a boot parameter, and then NOHOTPLUG=YES and NOCOLDPLUG=YES, but boot is still hanging in the same places - it seems that these boot parameters don't work in 9.0.
-----
I'm about ready to conclude that the SuSE desktop is not ready for prime time, and that SuSE doesn't care. I know that's harsh - but skimpy and apparently inaccurate documentation along with too much stuff
Larry Johnson KISE wrote: that does not
work like HP printers/Scanners (only works under root)/PC Webcams and meaningless error messages/unstable applications/too much system maintenance have tolerance limits in users, especially me. Too much time, not enough results.
I short, I'm bummed about it. Larry Johnson, KeepItSimpleEngineering,Inc.
Why are you judging Suse on an *old* version, that seems to make very little good technological sense.
You need to run 9.1 with all of the updates before making any valid judgments about whether or not "SuSE" is "ready for prime time".
I have to say that the powers-that-be continue to insist upon Microsoft products where I work and we suffer *daily* troubles with lost files, crashing windows, incompatibilities, unnecessary virus vulnerabilities, constant needs for "critical security updates", etc.
In the real world there is no perfect desktop but I have chosen Suse 9.1 and run it on my notebook at home and at work -- interfaced with the lesser Microsoft machines -- because I trust it for security and stability that no version of MS Windows has ever offered.
IMHO, YMMV ... ;-)
-- Thanks! & 73, doc kd4e West Central Florida 100% Linux. Suse 9.1 Drake, Hallicrafters, Heathkit, TenTec, Yaesu Radio Life: http://www.gospelcom.net/twr/ Linux-Incompatible hardware is defective! USA Pres. Election 2004: http://www.rnc.org/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Monday 26 July 2004 22:18, Larry Johnson KISE wrote:
Well after looking at the syslog with full debugging turned on, it's clear that hotplugging is the culprit.
So I disable the four USB 1.1 ports from the motherboard BIOS, and now I get a 4 minute boot, down from 9 minutes.
~ maybe, solution: un-plug all USB plugs, before booting? then, plug USB plugs back in, after booting? -- best wishes ____________ sent on Linux ____________
-----Original Message----- From: pinto [mailto:pinto45@aig.forthnet.gr] <snip> then, plug USB plugs back in, after booting?
--
best wishes
____________
sent on Linux
____________
Jack may be nimble and quick — but I'm not. In any case I suspect it's the motherboard integrated USB hubs that are the problem, and only the four 1.1 hubs can be disabled in the BIOS, and this only reduced the boot to four minutes. I'll admit that I've gone through such gyrations to get a system running in the past, but on a modern computer it would seem a throwback to ancient times. Larry Johnson. KeepItSimpleEngineering,Inc.
Hi All. I got quite a bit of assistance working on this (none from SuSE), and I want to thank all of them. In order to better understand what was happening, I installed the latest Slackware, Debian and Mandrake distributions. I was also prepared to install RedHat 9, but didn't need to. The Mandrake 10.0 distribution provided the solution to all the fundamental problems plus a few others, to wit. - Boot time: >9 minutes *to* <90 seconds. - Scanner: doesn't work except as superuser *to* works fine with normal user after installation with no additional configuration. - DualHead display: Requires trial and error with YAST *to* works after installation with no additional configuration. - Installation options: None available (to avoid problematic boot processes) *to* available (e.g. disable hotplug). - Vendor support: Promised, needed and non-existent *to* not needed. - USB: problematic *to* no problems. - KDE: Works OK *to* improved screen presentation e.g. more suitable configuration from install. - Speed: Slower than Win2K *to* Faster than Win2K and much faster than SuSE 9.0 - Kernel: 2.4. optimized for AMD *to* 2.6. not optimized. - Ease of installation: Very long with moderate difficulty *to* fast and easy. - Graphic installation: Pretty but sometimes confusing *to* simple and straightforward. - Printer: Worked after additional configuration *to* worked after installation. - GRUB: Restore MBR fails *to* Restore MBR works. - VGA boot screen: flips back and forth from graphic to text, text hard to read *to* easy to read (except it goes so fast) text mode. - User group support: Great *to* too soon to tell but looks good. I'm sure there are many features of SuSE that are better than Mandrake, but here I'm focusing on the problems I had with SuSE that basically made it unusable for me as a desktop. So I'm sticking with Mandrake for a desktop - & I'm happy as a clam with SuSE for my servers. I expect to pay for what I use, I have now purchased 5 distributions of SuSE. The last three were to achieve a useable desktop replacement for Windows, and the last three were also a waste of time and money for me. Larry Johnson, KeepItSimpleEngineering, Inc.
-----Original Message----- From: Larry Johnson KISE [mailto:ljohnson@kise-inc.com] Sent: Monday, July 26, 2004 15:18 To: suse-linux-e@suse.com Subject: RE: [SLE] Boot time excessive for clean SuSE 9.0 install
Well after looking at the syslog with full debugging turned on, it's clear that hotplugging is the culprit.
So I disable the four USB 1.1 ports from the motherboard BIOS, and now I get a 4 minute boot, down from 9 minutes.
So the I disable USB hotplugging with SuSE configuration to avoid my USB 2.0 ports, and now I get a 1 minute boot.
I review the HOTPLUG docs in SuSE 9.0 - practically zilch.
I go to hotplugging at sourceforge, http://sourceforge.net/projects/linux-hotplug/ and about the time the SuSE scripts were written signed off, there are threads about all kinds of problems with USB and delays - some from SuSE. There is a bug reported 25 July 2004 about this same issue. (997624)
This explains the NOHOTPLUG and NOCOLDPLUG options in SuSE 9.1.
So I say that SuSE sold a distribution with a buggy boot scheme, didn't provide a workable alternative, that they were aware of it, and are unwilling to acknowledge it. I would love to be wrong about this.
Apparently (unverified) the use of multiple & mixed versions of USB hubs triggers the problem - standard features of my Gigabyte GA-7VRXP Rev 2.0 motherboard.
There are some indications that the problem also exists in SuSE 9.1 as well as other distributions that use hotplugging.
I have spent quite a bit of time discovering this unpleasant fact, and I am very unhappy about it.
Pressure from users (as well as the Linux community) has moved MS to improve their products and practices, perhaps it could work for SuSE/Novell too.
Larry Johnson, KeepItSimpleEngineering,Inc.
-----Original Message----- From: doc [mailto:kd4e@verizon.net] Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2004 18:29 To: suse-linux-e@suse.com Subject: Re: [SLE] Boot time excessive for clean SuSE 9.0 install
So I tried NOHOTPLUG=YES as a boot parameter, and then NOHOTPLUG=YES and NOCOLDPLUG=YES, but boot is still hanging in the same places - it seems that these boot parameters don't work in 9.0.
-----
I'm about ready to conclude that the SuSE desktop is not ready for prime time, and that SuSE doesn't care. I know that's harsh - but skimpy and apparently inaccurate documentation along with too much stuff
Larry Johnson KISE wrote: that does not
work like HP printers/Scanners (only works under root)/PC Webcams and meaningless error messages/unstable applications/too much system maintenance have tolerance limits in users, especially me. Too much time, not enough results.
I short, I'm bummed about it. Larry Johnson, KeepItSimpleEngineering,Inc.
Why are you judging Suse on an *old* version, that seems to make very little good technological sense.
You need to run 9.1 with all of the updates before making any valid judgments about whether or not "SuSE" is "ready for prime time".
I have to say that the powers-that-be continue to insist upon Microsoft products where I work and we suffer *daily* troubles with lost files, crashing windows, incompatibilities, unnecessary virus vulnerabilities, constant needs for "critical security updates", etc.
In the real world there is no perfect desktop but I have chosen Suse 9.1 and run it on my notebook at home and at work -- interfaced with the lesser Microsoft machines -- because I trust it for security and stability that no version of MS Windows has ever offered.
IMHO, YMMV ... ;-)
-- Thanks! & 73, doc kd4e West Central Florida 100% Linux. Suse 9.1 Drake, Hallicrafters, Heathkit, TenTec, Yaesu Radio Life: http://www.gospelcom.net/twr/ Linux-Incompatible hardware is defective! USA Pres. Election 2004: http://www.rnc.org/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Sun, 2004-07-25 at 18:15 -0700, Larry Johnson KISE wrote:
So I tried NOHOTPLUG=YES as a boot parameter, and then NOHOTPLUG=YES and NOCOLDPLUG=YES, but boot is still hanging in the same places - it seems that these boot parameters don't work in 9.0.
Look at the scripts /etc/init.d/hotplug and /etc/init.d/coldplug, those are the ones interpreting those parameters. In 9.1 they are there and caught, I don't have 9.0 here at the moment to check, but in 9.1 it looks like hotplug: if [ -n "$NOHOTPLUG" ] ; then hotplug: echo -n "Hotplug will be disabled due to NOHOTPLUG=$NOHOTPLUG" and coldplug: if [ -n "$NOCOLDPLUG" ] ; then coldplug: echo -n "Coldplug will not be executed due to NOCOLDPLUG=$NOCOLDPLUG" Note that the parameters are case sensitive
-----
I'm about ready to conclude that the SuSE desktop is not ready for prime time, and that SuSE doesn't care. I know that's harsh - but skimpy and apparently inaccurate documentation along with too much stuff that does not work like HP printers/Scanners (only works under root)/PC Webcams and meaningless error messages/unstable applications/too much system maintenance have tolerance limits in users, especially me. Too much time, not enough results.
Sorry to hear that, I've had excellent results with it
* Anders Johansson
Look at the scripts /etc/init.d/hotplug and /etc/init.d/coldplug, those are the ones interpreting those parameters. In 9.1 they are there and caught, I don't have 9.0 here at the moment to check,
They are *not* available in 9.0. -- Patrick Shanahan Registered Linux User #207535 http://wahoo.no-ip.org @ http://counter.li.org HOG # US1244711 Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/photos
-----Original Message----- From: Anders Johansson [mailto:andjoh@rydsbo.net] <snip> On Sun, 2004-07-25 at 18:15 -0700, Larry Johnson KISE wrote:
So I tried NOHOTPLUG=YES as a boot parameter, and then NOHOTPLUG=YES and NOCOLDPLUG=YES, but boot is still hanging in the same places - it seems that these boot parameters don't work in 9.0.
Look at the scripts /etc/init.d/hotplug and /etc/init.d/coldplug, those are the ones interpreting those parameters. In 9.1 they are there and caught, I don't have 9.0 here at the moment to check, but in 9.1 it looks like
hotplug: if [ -n "$NOHOTPLUG" ] ; then hotplug: echo -n "Hotplug will be disabled due to NOHOTPLUG=$NOHOTPLUG"
First let me thank Anders for his suggestions, of which I could use more. It's people like Anders that make the Linux community terrific. Well I searched for NOHOTPLUG in /etc and found nothing, so that explains why those options didn't work. Their use was documented in SuSE Linux portal @ http://portal.suse.com/sdb/en/2004/05/91_coldhotplug.html which obviously doesn't apply to SuSE 9.0. Out of curiosity, I found 17 Shell Scripts & 1 text (conf file) when I searched for "HOTPLUG" in /etc. I changed "HOTPLUG_DEBUG" to "max" and produced 4590+ lines in /var/log/messages. (not including 157 repeated lines) I'll send it (or anything else) zipped to anybody who's interested. It includes at least 231 seconds of "sleep n" lines. /var/log/warn is shorter and a little scarier, and I've appended it to this message. (kise-003 is my workstation) Let me restate my points on this. A desktop Linux package should provide minimum performance, and a 9 minute boot is below minimum performance. A desktop Linux package should provide minimum (and accurate) documentation, so if there is an unusual problem, it can be solved by members of the Linux support community, not the case with SuSE 9.0. A desktop Linux package provider should provide support when there is a problem with it's distribution not covered in the documentation or solvable by the Linux support community, not the case with SuSE 9.0. Sensible IT protocols would allow a alternative or exit strategy to a new major change in the operating system (e.g. hotplugging), apparently not the case with SuSE 9.0. Too much stuff doesn't work. I conclude that SuSE 9.0 has basic elements that are "beta" (or even "alpha") release quality, and I say that does not bode well for SuSE, Novell or even Linux desktop. I am not so much annoyed as disappointed. This is my 5th Linux distribution from SuSE, the first to offer the kind of desktop features I use everyday in my work, and it has been a great frustration and disappointment. Larry Johnson, KeepItSimpleEngineering,Inc. p.s. I am pleased with the four SuSE servers I run.
participants (5)
-
Anders Johansson -
doc -
Larry Johnson KISE -
Patrick Shanahan -
pinto