Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 18 Feb 2012 16:03:42 -0800
From:      Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org>
To:        perryh@pluto.rain.com
Cc:        rank1seeker@gmail.com, sendtomatt@gmail.com, hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: 8 to 9: Kernel modularization -- did it change?
Message-ID:  <4F403C5E.4000104@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <4f3ff151.FznGzC6RC0a5qBKx%perryh@pluto.rain.com>
References:  <CAOjFWZ6WM1bLEwaBiUE50Gj4MrwxefDWFb85ecRtYkSDuZ0erg@mail.gmail.com> <mailpost.1329495670.7246668.67851.mailing.freebsd.hackers@FreeBSD.cs.nctu.edu.tw> <4F3E8225.9030501@FreeBSD.org> <E1RyRKJ-000Ioa-Ec@hans3> <4F3E8C26.3080900@FreeBSD.org> <E1RyRq0-000Iqy-3l@hans3> <4F3EA5F2.9070804@gmail.com> <E1RyTZo-000J0R-0Y@hans3> <4F3EAE5F.6070903@gmail.com> <E1RyUv6-000J5e-0E@hans3> <20120217.220802.988.2@DOMY-PC> <4F3EDEBC.7040703@gmail.com> <4F3EFB70.5000102@FreeBSD.org> <4f3ff151.FznGzC6RC0a5qBKx%perryh@pluto.rain.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 02/18/2012 10:43, perryh@pluto.rain.com wrote:
> Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org> wrote:
> 
>> loading modules through loader.conf is
>> veeeeeerrrrryyyyyy sssssllllloooooowwwwww ...
> 
> Is it noticeably slower to load (say) a 6MB kernel + 2MB of
> modules than to load an 8MB kernel?  

I don't know, that wasn't the problem I was trying to solve. If your
question is, "6 + 2-in-loader-conf" then I imagine that it would be
about the same speed, maybe a little slower due to extra file
open-read-close cycles. If it's "6 + 2-in-kld_list" then I imagine it
would be quite a bit faster than an 8 M kernel, but I look forward to
the results of your testing. :)


Doug

-- 

	It's always a long day; 86400 doesn't fit into a short.

	Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
	Yours for the right price.  :)  http://SupersetSolutions.com/




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4F403C5E.4000104>