[lkml]   [2004]   [Jan]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: 2.6.1-rc1-tiny2

    Matt Mackall wrote:

    >On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 05:33:58PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
    >>Matt Mackall wrote:
    >>>This is the fourth release of the -tiny kernel tree. The aim of this
    >>>tree is to collect patches that reduce kernel disk and memory
    >>>footprint as well as tools for working on small systems. Target users
    >>>are things like embedded systems, small or legacy desktop folks, and
    >>Have you considered Adrian Bunk's CPU selection rationalisation work?
    >Vaguely aware of it.

    Basically, because the types of x86 cpus are only partially ordered,
    and a the CPU selection somehow tries to follow the rule "this CPU or
    higher", there ends up being a bit of stuff included which doesn't
    need to be. Not sure what the savings add up to though...

    >>The last argument I heard against it was that there is lower hanging
    >>fruit for size reduction. You seem to have got a lot of that.
    >Yes, a fair amount. Btw, what's the size differential for piggin-sched
    >vs mainline?

    Very little, I think my sched.o is about 40 bytes bigger on UP. Its about
    4K bigger for SMP, but thats with quite a bit of init stuff to set up the
    sched domains. It also does HT scheduling, and some more of that could be
    ifdefed I guess (its already 1-2K smaller than Ingo's shared runqueues).

    If you're talking about my interactivity stuff, then that is very little
    difference as well, maybe a few tens of bytes smaller. The scheduler is
    pretty lean.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:59    [W:0.023 / U:3.824 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site