From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 5 12:38:45 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5070316A4DA for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2006 12:38:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org) Received: from mail7.sea5.speakeasy.net (mail7.sea5.speakeasy.net [69.17.117.9]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0657543D99 for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2006 12:38:17 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org) Received: (qmail 782 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2006 12:38:13 -0000 Received: from dsl092-078-145.bos1.dsl.speakeasy.net (HELO be-well.ilk.org) ([66.92.78.145]) (envelope-sender ) by mail7.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 5 Sep 2006 12:38:13 -0000 Received: by be-well.ilk.org (Postfix, from userid 1147) id B636428449; Tue, 5 Sep 2006 08:38:12 -0400 (EDT) To: "David Wassman" References: From: Lowell Gilbert Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2006 08:38:12 -0400 In-Reply-To: (David Wassman's message of "Sat, 2 Sep 2006 16:08:10 -0400") Message-ID: <441wqqlc97.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: FreeBSD-Questions Mailing List Subject: Re: Device Drivers and Kernel Modules X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2006 12:38:45 -0000 "David Wassman" writes: > I am trying to figure out which would be best, to load all the device > drivers through compiling them into the kernel or to load them at boot > through loader.conf. > > I would think that loader.conf would be more convenient as changing hardware > wuld not require a rebuild of the kernel. Is there a draw back to loading > devices this way other than a longer boot up time (which should not be an > issue as the system is 24-7)? There is little difference for your purposes. > I have also heard that loading modules through the loader.conf saves on RAM > performance as the module in question is not loaded into memory until it is > used as opposed to being loaded with the kernel. If this makes no sense, i > appologize. I remember reading it somewhere on a mailing list several years > ago and can't find the reference anymore. From memory it stated modules such > as cd9660 could be loaded through entering CD9660_load="YES" in > loader.confand that it would not be used in memory until a cd was > mounted. I am > assuming this is true (if it is) for other modules as well. It isn't true at all. Loading a module really does load it into memory. -- Lowell Gilbert, embedded/networking software engineer, Boston area http://be-well.ilk.org/~lowell/