From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 15 13:56:54 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B889316A417 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2006 13:56:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (lurza.secnetix.de [83.120.8.8]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1864243D62 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2006 13:56:39 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (xeryjg@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id kAFDuPNf098267; Wed, 15 Nov 2006 14:56:31 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from oliver.fromme@secnetix.de) Received: (from olli@localhost) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.1/Submit) id kAFDuOXE098265; Wed, 15 Nov 2006 14:56:24 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from olli) Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 14:56:24 +0100 (CET) Message-Id: <200611151356.kAFDuOXE098265@lurza.secnetix.de> From: Oliver Fromme To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, youshi10@u.washington.edu In-Reply-To: <455A16AF.5040200@u.washington.edu> X-Newsgroups: list.freebsd-hackers User-Agent: tin/1.8.2-20060425 ("Shillay") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/4.11-STABLE (i386)) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.1.2 (lurza.secnetix.de [127.0.0.1]); Wed, 15 Nov 2006 14:56:31 +0100 (CET) Cc: Subject: Re: bpf kernel module X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, youshi10@u.washington.edu List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 13:56:54 -0000 Garrett Cooper wrote: > Something else I should have mentioned. Statically building components > into the kernel makes operation faster overall, I don't think there's a measurable difference in speed. > but increases the > required memory for your machine, whereas using modules is more > expensive time-wise, but you can load portions of the kernel piece by > piece, instead of load the entire kernel into main memory. In the case discussed here (bpf), memory is not an issue, because the bpf module -- if it existed -- would have to be loaded permanently anyway, or otherwise pflogd wouldn't work. In fact, a kernel module requires a small amount of additional memory, compared to the same code compiled statically into the kernel. It's not a big deal, though. Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing Dienstleistungen mit Schwerpunkt FreeBSD: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd Any opinions expressed in this message may be personal to the author and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of secnetix in any way. "Being really good at C++ is like being really good at using rocks to sharpen sticks." -- Thant Tessman