[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: i386 and the COMPAT_50 option
> Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
> Quentin Garnier <cube%cubidou.net@localhost> wrote:
> > Modules as a mean to save kernel size is a red herring anyway.
> AFAIR, this is the first (and only?) reason why they have been widely
> used at the origin. Previously LKM use was marginal.
You're quoting Quentin out of context.
"Modules as a mean to save kernel size is a red herring anyway. Compat
code, by definition, only changes when the actual kernel changes its
interfaces, it's not something that can have a life of its own."
LKMs are a mechanism to save kernel memory by not loading code you'll
not use (e.g. because you don't have the relevant hardware), but what
Quentin said was that Compat code doesn't multiply the way drivers
do, so it may not be worth LKM'ing it, if the justification is based
David Maxwell, david%vex.net@localhost|david%maxwell.net@localhost -->
Any sufficiently advanced Common Sense will seem like magic...
Main Index |
Thread Index |