Re: [2.6 patch] make UNIX a bool

[Adrian Bunk]

On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 10:09:52PM -0500, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Monday 27 February 2006 17:29, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 05:18:06PM -0500, James C. Georgas wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2006-25-02 at 17:01 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > > CONFIG_UNIX=m doesn't make much sense.
> > > 
> > > I've been building it as a module forever. I often load kernels from
> > > floppy disk, and building CONFIG_UNIX as a module often makes the
> > > difference between the kernel fitting or not fitting on the disk. Could
> > > we please keep this functionality?
> > 
> > If size is important for you, you should consider completely disabling 
> > module support in your kernels:
> > 
> > In my testing, disabling module support brings you a space gain in the 
> > range of 10%.
> >
> 
> This only matters when you tight on memory - in the scenario above memory
> may not be a great concern but kernel image size is because modules could
> go on other medium.

It does also matter in the kernel image size case, since you have to put 
enough modules to the other medium for having a effect bigger than the
kernel image size increase from setting CONFIG_MODULES=y.

> Dmitry

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/