Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 21 Jul 1998 12:02:50 +0200 | From | Daniel Pittman <> | Subject | Re: Memory Rusting Effect [re: Linux hostile to poverty] |
| |
Chris Wedgwood wrote:
> > Hmmm. On my system, network protocols with no active sockets and unused > > filesystems are already "swapped out" - or, at least, they do not eat my > > memory as I compiled them as modules... > > Modules are arguably a better way of doing this, but for some stuff, they > may be kernel data structures which could be swapped out.
Ok, I pay that - how much kernel data space is actually used by things like inactive network protocols, however - and could this possibly be solved by pushing that into the modules init code to allocate the kernel memory, or extend that data structure?
> I expect 2.3.x will be considerably more modular, especially the networking > code.
Well, this is probably a good thing(tm), even if I can't see where more modularity is needed right now. Someone will probably use it, I guess :)
[math-emu as module] > I'm not sure how you would handle FPU code if the module couldn't be loaded. > I guess you could alwas kill the process with a SIGILL or something, doesn't > seem like a very nice solution.
Ooops. You caught me on an assumption - I guess that SIGILL would be an ugly but resonable response if the module were not present, and could not be dynamically loaded for whatever reason; I forget that some sites may not use the kmod thread to bring in needed modules - I don't think (but really don't know) that doing the same for math emulation would be impossible...
Daniel
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html
| |