Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sat, 13 Oct 2001 11:48:11 +0200 (CEST) | From | Jan-Marek Glogowski <> | Subject | Re: crc32 cleanups |
| |
I think this summarizes the problems with the crc code
1. Should the crc code be included in the kernel generally ? 2. If not - should the user or the driver modules change the behaviour of the kernel build process ? 3. How do we provide crc functions for modules not included in the main kernel tree ? 4. Should we use precompiled tables (bigger kernel) or use more compex (slower) algorithms ?
I think the code should generally be included in the kernel - we can add somewhere an option like "Remove crc code from kernel if not used" marked as "dangerous". So the user can force removal if he is sure, he will never use the code. The drivers included in the kernel may still enable the code, if needed, but extern drivers won't work.
To safe space or gain performance we should add a select option next to the "remove crc" one ("Optimize crc code for space/performance")
Comments
Jan-Marek Glogowski
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |