Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 15 Jan 2002 13:18:07 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 15 Jan 2002 13:17:58 -0500 Received: from warden.digitalinsight.com ([208.29.163.2]:62453 "HELO warden.diginsite.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Tue, 15 Jan 2002 13:17:39 -0500 From: David Lang To: Aaron Lehmann Cc: Linux Kernel List Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 10:17:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: Hardwired drivers are going away? In-Reply-To: <20020115172413.GD7030@vitelus.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org CML2 is a tradeoff in the kernel config process. it (currently) trades time for correctness. It has no effect after you have built the kernel. I like this becouse there have been several times where I have had to go on a scavanger hunt to figure out what option I need to turn on before I can turn on another option (something that CML2 will fix) as for the kbuild 2.5 performance 'penalty', is it really slower then always doign make dep; make clean; make bzImage? Yes I know I don't always have to do that, but I don't understand the rules as to when I do and when I don't (they sound simple at first but there keep being exceptions raised). having the new kernel build process always get this right is valuble. also the time penalties associated with these two options is something that can (and will) be dealt with over time as they get optimized and rewritten to be faster. these are VERY different from the modules thing which is permanently introducing additional penalties into the system that can affect it for as long as it's running. David Lang On Tue, 15 Jan 2002, Aaron Lehmann wrote: > On Mon, Jan 14, 2002 at 10:50:20AM -0800, David Lang wrote: > > I can see a couple reasons for building a kernel without useing modules. > > I agree with all of yours. IMHO, the proposed scheme for 2.5 is plain > bad. It will require an initrd (initramfs, or whatever), and force > kernel installation to be more difficult. The performance overhead > sounds like a major downside, epsecially when currently people know > what hardware they have and build things into the kernel accordingly. > > Between this and CML2, my mental image of 2.5+ is starting to look > very grim. > - 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/