when startup delays become bugs

[Ric Wheeler]

On 05/16/2013 02:39 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Thu, 16.05.13 12:20, Chris Murphy (lists at colorremedies.com) wrote:
>
>> There have been no crashes, so ext4 doesn't need fsck on every boot:
>>
>>            4.051s systemd-fsck-root.service
>>             515ms
>>             systemd-fsck at dev-disk-by\x2duuid-09c66d01\x2d8126\x2d39c2\x2db7b8\x2d25f14cbd35af.service
> Well, but only fsck itself knows that and can determine this from the
> superblock. Hence we have to start it first and it will then exit
> quickly if the fs wasn't dirty.
>
> Note that these times might be misleading: if fsck takes this long to
> check the superblock and exit this might be a result of something else
> which runs in parallel monopolizing CPU or IO (for example readahead),
> and might not actually be fsck's own fault.

We really should not need to run fsck on boot unless the mount fails. Might save 
some time at the cost of a bit of extra complexity?

Ric

>
>> and no oops, so this seems unnecessary:
>>
>>            1.092s abrt-uefioops.service
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=963182
>
>> and I'm not using LVM so these seem unnecessary:
>>
>>
>>            2.783s lvm2-monitor.service
>>             489ms systemd-udev-settle.service
>>              15ms lvm2-lvmetad.service
>>
>> How do I determine what component to file a bug against? I guess I have to find the package that caused these .service files to be installed?
> $ repoquery --qf="%{sourcerpm}" --whatprovides '*/lib/systemd/system/lvm2-monitor.service'
> lvm2-2.02.98-8.fc19.src.rpm
>
> Please file a bug against the "lvm2" package. And make sure to add it to:
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=963210
>
> Hmm, on your machine, what does "systemctl show -p WantedBy -p
> RequiredBy systemd-udev-settle.service" show? This will tell us which
> package is actually responsible for pulling in
> systemd-udev-settle.service.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Lennart
>