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  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:   Tue, 4 Apr 2017 21:04:24 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <>
To:     Tom Zanussi <>
Cc:     Geert Uytterhoeven <>,
        Stuart Longland <>,
        Nicolas Pitre <>,
        Andi Kleen <>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <>,
        Jiri Slaby <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] minitty: a minimal TTY layer alternative for
 embedded systems

On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 8:59 PM, Tom Zanussi <> wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-04-04 at 20:08 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 7:59 PM, Tom Zanussi <> wrote:
>> > On Tue, 2017-04-04 at 00:05 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

>> > I was focused at that point mainly on the kernel static size, and using
>> > a combination of Josh Triplett's tinification tree, Andi Kleen's LTO and
>> > net-diet patches, and my own miscellaneous patches that I was planning
>> > on eventually upstreaming, I ended up with a system that I could boot to
>> > shell with a 455k text size:
>> >
>> > Memory: 235636K/245176K available (455K kernel code, 61K rwdata,
>> > 64K rodata, 132K init, 56K bss, 3056K reserved, 0K cma-reserved)

>> Thanks for sharing your experience. The question closer to this
>> discussion what did you do against TTY/UART/(related) layer(s)?
> I'd have to go back and take a look, but nothing special AFIAR.
> No patches or hacks along those lines, and the only related thing I see
> as far as config is:
>         cfg/pty-disable.scc \
> which maps to:
>         # CONFIG_UNIX98_PTYS is not set

But on your guestimation how much can we squeeze TTY/UART layer if we
do some compile-time configuration?
Does it even make sense or better to introduce something like minitty
special layer instead?

I believe you did some research during time of that project…

With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Powered by blists - more mailing lists