From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 11 04:18:59 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AD5716A403 for ; Mon, 11 Dec 2006 04:18:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from e.schuele@computer.org) Received: from sccrmhc15.comcast.net (sccrmhc15.comcast.net [204.127.200.85]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1157343CA4 for ; Mon, 11 Dec 2006 04:17:44 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from e.schuele@computer.org) Received: from [192.168.214.215] (cpe-76-184-133-124.tx.res.rr.com[76.184.133.124]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc15) with ESMTP id <200612110418580150070umae>; Mon, 11 Dec 2006 04:18:58 +0000 Message-ID: <457CDC30.9020102@computer.org> Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2006 22:18:56 -0600 From: Eric Schuele User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (X11/20061111) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: RW References: <200612100905.30430.kirk@strauser.com> <200612110100.26229.fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com> <200612110230.47544.fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com> In-Reply-To: <200612110230.47544.fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Advantages of trimmed kernel? 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: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 04:18:59 -0000 On 12/10/06 20:30, RW wrote: > On Monday 11 December 2006 01:47, Juha Saarinen wrote: >> On 12/11/06, RW wrote: >>> As I understand it the argument in favour of smaller kernels isn't that >>> they free-up memory for other uses, it's that they make better uses of >>> memory cache. >>> >>> OTOH big blocks of code that are rarely entered probably aren't going to >>> degrade performance much. >> Security through less code? Hmm, dunno. > > Who mentioned security? > I don't think anyone did... but the thought is in the right direction I think. With a smaller kernel and thus less code floating around... would the possibility of compromise be less? Sure, in some situations. See FreeBSD-SA-06:25.kmem. -Eric _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > -- Regards, Eric