linux-kernel - Re: [patch 024/144] allow /proc/config.gz to be built as a module

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 1 Oct 2006 11:36:00 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
To:	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>
Cc:	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, torvalds@...l.org,
	rossb@...gle.com, akpm@...gle.com, sam@...nborg.org
Subject: Re: [patch 024/144] allow /proc/config.gz to be built as a module

On Sun, 1 Oct 2006 09:39:54 -0700
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net> wrote:

> On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 23:27:25 -0700 akpm@...l.org wrote:
> 
> > From: Ross Biro <rossb@...gle.com>
> > 
> > The driver for /proc/config.gz consumes rather a lot of memory and it is in
> > fact possible to build it as a module.
> > 
> > In some ways this is a bit risky, because the .config which is used for
> > compiling kernel/configs.c isn't necessarily the same as the .config which was
> > used to build vmlinux.
> > 
> > But OTOH the potential memory savings are decent, and it'd be fairly dumb to
> > build your configs.o with a different .config.
> 
> so after getting several disagreements on this, you are going ahead
> with it.

Actually I had this mentally tagged as "needs more arguing before merging"
but then forgot and went and sent it anyway.

So now it's in the "needs more arguing before we revert it" category.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/