Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 27 Feb 2000 19:18:54 -0500 | From | Jeff Garzik <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2.3.48] initrd fix (Mike Galbraith) |
| |
Russell King wrote: > > Alan Cox writes: > > > Is there any reason (apart from making vmlinux and kernel binary images larger) > > > for explicitly initialising variables with 0 when they will be placed in the > > > BSS anyway? > > > > Long long ago (before 1.0) the kernel didnt zero the BSS. Some legacy of > > that survives in old assignments - otherwise none > > Oh, I remember those kernels ;) > > However, I noticed that the patch was introducing some extra explicit zero > initialisations.
Here is one from my todo list...
Run 'nm vmlinux' with the sort-by-size argument. Guess what the biggest objects in the entire kernel are? The dentry and inode hash table base arrays...
Unless there is hidden stuff, a nice fix for this would be to make their allocation dynamic at the beginning of fs_init() or somesuch.
-- Jeff Garzik | "Are you the police?" Building 1024 | MandrakeSoft, Inc. | "No ma'am. We're musicians."
- 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.tux.org/lkml/
| |