Linux 3.15 Should Suspend & Resume Much Faster

[tomtomme]

I wish if they could somehow improve boot speed. It is probably not kernel fault. Boot speed of popular Linux distributions is horrible compared to Windows 8. It gives a bad impression of bloated and slow system to new users.

this is my boottime on an full opensuse tumbleweed KDE installation:

 systemd-analyze
Startup finished in 3.331s (kernel) + 3.782s (userspace) = 7.114s

note this is a AMD E-350 (2x1.5Ghz and a SSD).
I guess this is faster than windows 8 would need on this machine.
my main core2Quad system only needs 4 seconds for the same OS and even more services starting at boot (like nfs server).

If you use ubuntu your blame should go to upstart. I run it on other machines and it starts up slow compared to systemd distros.

[zanny]

Startup finished in 3.291s (firmware) + 34ms (loader) + 2.227s (kernel) + 979ms (userspace) = 6.533s

That is on an 840 Pro, systemd, and KDE.

I'd much rather put effort into getting rid of that filthy disgusting bloated black box EFI firmware for coreboot. But that isn't really something the kernel developers have influence over, you just have to buy chipsets that support it.

[Viper_Scull]

Startup finished in 2.327s (kernel) + 673ms (userspace) = 3.000s

That's mine and it was faster with custom kernel. I seriously doubt I could get that time with Windows 8.

[Pajn]

I have never noticed that resume are slow.
Even on my Z-box ID 18 resume is faster that what it takes my TV to understand
that it got data on the HDMI.

What I would like is better compatibility with hardware. My Ethernet port didn't resume
correctly until doing a hack.

[dalingrin]

I wish if they could somehow improve boot speed. It is probably not kernel fault. Boot speed of popular Linux distributions is horrible compared to Windows 8. It gives a bad impression of bloated and slow system to new users.

Linux boot speed is already very fast. I suggest trying a different distro. My Arch Linux installs on both my desktop and laptop boot extremely quick. I haven't timed them exactly but it seems to be identical in speed to Windows 8.1.

[GreatEmerald]

Startup finished in 11.661s (firmware) + 12.328s (loader) + 3.912s (kernel) + 15.623s (userspace) = 43.524s

So it's 19 seconds for me (this is on a hybrid HDD/SSD, no bcache, btrfs). The longest thing is "4.849s systemd-remount-fs.service", which is due to my fstab being "LABEL=openSUSE / btrfs autodefrag,compress=lzo 0 0" (the wait would probably go away if I used "defaults", but I need to wait for those to become defaults first).

This is a whole lot of an improvement over the two minutes (and 10 second remount) I had when I was running an HDD only.

[kernelOfTruth]

I wish if they could somehow improve boot speed. It is probably not kernel fault. Boot speed of popular Linux distributions is horrible compared to Windows 8. It gives a bad impression of bloated and slow system to new users.

Windows 8 is fucking slow (sorry for the expression) after having disabled all the cheating, after that Windows 7 and Windows XP (even Vista !) boot up significantly and noticably faster

[startzz]

Windows 8 is fucking slow (sorry for the expression) after having disabled all the cheating, after that Windows 7 and Windows XP (even Vista !) boot up significantly and noticably faster

Nope, after disabling quick shutdown, win8 boots still faster than linux, not to mention, that windows loads at least 10 times more data in the same or less amount of time
And that systemd boot time is not real, it still takes at least 5 more seconds for GUI to load.

[tuubi]

Nope, after disabling quick shutdown, win8 boots still faster than linux, not to mention, that windows loads at least 10 times more data in the same or less amount of time
And that systemd boot time is not real, it still takes at least 5 more seconds for GUI to load.

Please don't throw around numbers like you've measured them, as you obviously haven't. And of course the boot time is real. Why would you think starting a gui would take five seconds on a system that can start up everything else in a couple of seconds?

[startzz]

Please don't throw around numbers like you've measured them, as you obviously haven't. And of course the boot time is real. Why would you think starting a gui would take five seconds on a system that can start up everything else in a couple of seconds?

Maybe obviously, because i TESTED IT and i know what im talking about ??? lol ...