Harald Hoyer (harald@xxxxxxxxxx) said: > What makes you think so? > > Is the udevd binary slower? > > Is selinux making it slower? > > Are the default rules in > /etc/udev/rules.d/05-udev-early.rules > /etc/udev/rules.d/50-udev.rules > /etc/udev/rules.d/95-pam-console.rules > slow? > > What is upstream? udev-113/etc/udev/redhat or udev-113/etc/udev/suse ???? I've never noticed it being 100x slower. However, there are a couple of cases for improvement: - make_extra_nodes in start_udev is relatively slow. The more we can avoid using this, the better - 60-libsane.rules takes measureable time in udevd just to *parse*, even though they're skipped on bootup. As part of deprecating/removing pam_console (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/FeatureRemovePAMConsole), these can hopefully go away - the bluetooth rules could use some skip/goto - is check_cdrom.sh really needed? But still, this only shaves startup by about a second or so. Bill -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
