linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] kbuild: add target to install gzipped modules

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: <CAMOw1v4SCpOXuGmFXGfk01gRdzgvV0G0QR-wmJHRbd3XHpVFMg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 30 Dec 2011 12:07:14 -0200
From:	Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@...fusion.mobi>
To:	Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>
Cc:	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>, linux-modules@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] kbuild: add target to install gzipped modules

On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 8:30 AM, Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz> wrote:
> On 29.12.2011 18:35, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
>> The operation that is used most of the time is to load modules. The
>> reason for having modules gzipped is the same one as for kernel image:
>
> The reason for having the kernel compressed is that the x86 bootloader
> reads the kernel (and initrd) using bios calls. That's not the case for
> modules.

It could be when it was added, but it's not anymore.


Really, I wouldn't like the discussion to be whether having compressed
modules is good or not, but rather if it's good to have a install rule
that does all the things the right way and only once, given people
*are using* compressed modules.

Lucas De Marchi
--
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/