Measured time spent in these: between 100 and 300ms (depending on I/O, I assume). It's a modest win for boot time, but it's also a very simple patch (https://paste.ubuntu.com/23476239/)
Despite being referenced in other services as an "after", it seems (from manually applying above patch) that other services start and normally (Before manual patch: https://paste.ubuntu.com/23479860/, after manual patch: https://paste.ubuntu.com/23479865/ , both taken on a machine with no "splash" in cmdline)
It seems like a clear cut case of removing "dead" code conditionally (switching on the cmdline presence of "splash" as for the starting service), but of course I might not have the whole picture.
I intend to try the same on a desktop machine with and without a "splash" cmdline, with FDE enabled.
(sorry for the shallow bug report - I intended to fill it up some more but it fell through the cracks)
Specific units are:
plymouth- read-write. service quit.service quit-wait. service
plymouth-
plymouth-
Measured time spent in these: between 100 and 300ms (depending on I/O, I assume). It's a modest win for boot time, but it's also a very simple patch (https:/ /paste. ubuntu. com/23476239/)
Despite being referenced in other services as an "after", it seems (from manually applying above patch) that other services start and normally (Before manual patch: https:/ /paste. ubuntu. com/23479860/, after manual patch: https:/ /paste. ubuntu. com/23479865/ , both taken on a machine with no "splash" in cmdline)
It seems like a clear cut case of removing "dead" code conditionally (switching on the cmdline presence of "splash" as for the starting service), but of course I might not have the whole picture.
I intend to try the same on a desktop machine with and without a "splash" cmdline, with FDE enabled.