On Wed, 2007-09-05 at 21:31 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 08:14:12PM +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> > On Wednesday 05 September 2007 19:38, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > > > > You version doesn't work with CONFIG_MODULES right?
> > > >
> > > > It works with CONFIG_MODULES.
> > >
> > > Really? Take a look at this version,
> > >
> > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/6/4/169
> > >
> > > Marcello had to implement a two pass build to add back symbol used in
> > > modules which got removed from the main kernel.. You don't appear to do
> > > that. Marcelo also claims better size reduction than you.
> >
> > This will discard EXPORT_SYMBOLs potentially used by
> > out-of-tree modules.
> >
> > I also saw ~10% size reductions, but then at run-time test modules
> > failed to load, they didn't find needed symbols.
> >
> > OTOH if I know that I am not going to be using such modules,
> > then this can be done. Will require another CONFIG_xxx, though.
>
> One point to keep in mind is that the space penalty of CONFIG_MODULES=y
> is so big that CONFIG_MODULES=n is actually the most interesting case
> for small systems that really need small kernels.
Marcelo's version actual deals with the CONFIG_MODULES=y penalty , which
is interesting to me .. It removes symbols added for CONFIG_MODULES
which actually aren't used .. So CONFIG_MODULES=y is just as interesting
as without (to me at least..).
Daniel
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
