[lkml]   [2005]   [Jan]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/8] core-small: Introduce CONFIG_CORE_SMALL from -tiny
On Sun, Jan 23, 2005 at 12:40:42AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Matt Mackall <> wrote:
> >
> > This set of patches introduces a new config option CONFIG_CORE_SMALL
> > from the -tiny tree for small systems. This series should apply
> > cleanly against 2.6.11-rc1-mm2.
> >
> > When selected, it enables various tweaks to miscellaneous core data
> > structures to shrink their size on small systems. While each tweak is
> > fairly small, in aggregate they can save a substantial amount of
> > memory.
> You know what I'm going to ask ;) How much memory?

This stuff is mostly pretty small, a few K per patch. I think these 8
are about 40k total but my notes are several months old.

> I wish it didn't have "core" in the name. A little misleading.

Well I've got another set called NET_SMALL. BASE?

> Did you think of making CONFIG_CORE_SMALL an integer which has values zero
> or one?
> Then you can lose all those ifdefs:
> #define MAX_PROBE_HASH (255 - CONFIG_CORE_SMALL * 254) /* dorky */


> #define PID_MAX_DEFAULT (CONFIG_CORE_SMALL ? 0x1000 : 0x8000)
> etc.

Hmm. I think we'd want a hidden config variable for this and I'm not
sure how well the config language allows setting an int from a bool.
And then it would need another name. On the whole, seems more complex
than what I've done.

Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.
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 14:09    [W:0.081 / U:0.312 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site