Date: Tue, 14 Mar 1995 15:39:44 -0500 (EST) From: Peter Dufault <dufault@hda.com> To: julian@tfs.com (Julian Elischer) Cc: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: SCSI ASC-ASCQ descriptions Message-ID: <199503142039.PAA00285@hda.com> In-Reply-To: <m0rocnZ-0003x2C@TFS.COM> from "Julian Elischer" at Mar 14, 95 12:02:33 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Julian Elischer writes: > > > > > J Wunsch writes: > > > > > > I rather thought of an LKM to interpret the ASC's. Syslogd could > > > load it... :-) At least, the strings are no longer _static_ then. > nice idea, but we need it earlier then that, as Peter says... > > > > > I tried it this morning. It adds 4982 bytes of kernel bloat > > to put all the "additional sense code"/"additional sense > > code qualifier" descriptions in the kernel. > I wonder if compression would help in any way? > there are lots of words that are common.... > e.g. "ready, audio, logical, unit, required, progress, error, not " > > I'm really tempted to make a program to do this... :) Yes, I thought of that too. I even went through the effort of seeing how many unique words there are (about 300). If you had a clever way of finding "good overlap" I think you could cut the size in half or more. It is probably pointless to knock ourselves out to save 2048 bytes, though. > (and print it) > > > > Shall I commit this? > yes, I would, but it might be good top make an option to leave it out.. > (a SMALL option?) I prefer individual options documented in LINT. It is too hard to decide that something should always be left out when you want a SMALL kernel. -- Peter Dufault Real Time Machine Control and Simulation HD Associates, Inc. Voice: 508 433 6936 dufault@hda.com Fax: 508 433 5267
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199503142039.PAA00285>