Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 1 Oct 2009 12:07:33 -0700 | From | Greg KH <> | Subject | Re: Exposing device ids and driver names |
| |
On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 02:56:55PM -0400, Nathaniel McCallum wrote: > On 10/01/2009 02:40 PM, Greg KH wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 02:35:40PM -0400, Nathaniel McCallum wrote: > >> On 10/01/2009 02:05 PM, Greg KH wrote: > >>> On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 01:01:50PM -0400, Nathaniel McCallum wrote: > >>>> On 10/01/2009 12:42 PM, Greg KH wrote: > >>>>> Why not just use the baseline kernel as a model for this. Do a 'make > >>>>> allmodconfig' and then extract the data and publish it that way. No > >>>>> kernel changes are needed, and then any distro can be easily matched up > >>>>> by this based on what they are using. That will save you time in > >>>>> downloading zillions of distro releases, and provide a nice easy way to > >>>>> show what the kernel.org releases support. > >>>> > >>>> Unfortunately, I would not be able to track changes to the kernel in > >>>> this model. Since this is one of my explicit goals (to make sure that > >>>> distro kernel changes get upstream), I think a non-invasive kernel > >>>> modification would be worth the effort. > >>> > >>> But this was an invasive modification, it added space to the kernel > >>> images for no real benifit other than for your tracking tools. That's > >>> not going to fly unless you can find another good use for the change. > >> > >> Which is why I asked for advice for better options. I would prefer a > >> non-invasive modification. I am hoping that someone more familiar with > >> the layer would provide such a suggestion. > >> > >> One potential benefit for moving module info to ELF sections would be > >> the ability to strip kernel modules. As a test, I did this on a recent > >> Fedora rawhide kernel I had lying around. Stripping the modules results > >> in a 43% decrease in size (82M to 47M). > > > > Did those modules have debugging symbols enabled? That seems like a > > large savings for just the module device tables. > > It does not appear so (none of the debug sections are present). But I > could be wrong. > > Stripping the modules on the penultimate Fedora 11 kernel results in the > same drop in size. I can't imagine why a release kernel would have > anything extra left in the modules (unless it is just by accident).
Are you sure things still work after stripping? Stuff like systemtap and other tools?
thanks,
greg k-h
| |