linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/1] Embedded Maintainer(s), linux-embedded@...r list

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]

Message-Id: <1209582709.25560.441.camel@pmac.infradead.org>
Date:	Wed, 30 Apr 2008 20:11:49 +0100
From:	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc:	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
	linux-embedded@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Tim Bird <tim.bird@...sony.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] Embedded Maintainer(s), linux-embedded@...r list

On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 20:22 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org> writes:
> 
> > Andrew Morton has been saying recently that we need an 'embedded
> > maintainer', to take responsibility for 'embedded issues' in the core
> > kernel, as well as trying to improve our relationship with those using
> > the Linux kernel for 'embedded' devices -- who have a reputation of
> > not working with us very closely; to their detriment as well as our
> > own.
> 
> I hope your job description doesn't include adding more and more
> CONFIGs though.
> 
> I am sure there are lots of low hanging fruit where memory can be
> saved and it's a good thing someone cares about that, but please don't
> focus on the code size only. Or if you work on that don't do it 
> using CONFIG or when you really add a new one find some other 
> that is pointless and remove it first. 
> 
> There are simply already far too many of them and they make the 
> kernel harder and harder to change.

I agree. And if we do want to pay attention to pure code size, there are
other approaches -- like --gc-sections and/or building with '--combine
-fwhole-program' which I was playing with for OLPC a while back. I must
dust that off now that the GCC fixes should mostly have made it into
current distributions.

-- 
dwmw2

--
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/