Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 11:45:35 -0800 From: matt <sendtomatt@gmail.com> To: Alex Goncharov <alex-goncharov@comcast.net> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, mav@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: 8 to 9: Kernel modularization -- did it change? Message-ID: <4F3EAE5F.6070903@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <E1RyTZo-000J0R-0Y@hans3> 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>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 02/17/12 11:34, Alex Goncharov wrote: > ,--- You/matt (Fri, 17 Feb 2012 11:09:38 -0800) ----* > | For what it's worth, it's just a change in GENERIC. It's not hard to > | compile a kernel with different options, > > That's what I've been doing for years, with e.g. > > # options INET6 # IPv6 communications protocols > # device cbb # cardbus (yenta) bridge > # device pccard # PC Card (16-bit) bus > # device cardbus # CardBus (32-bit) bus > > in my kernel configuration on 8; there was no snd_hda there, and this > is why I asked about the possibly new kernel modularization in 9. > > | So recompile GENERIC without snd_hda, you're a power user. > > Yes, I see it in 9 now: > > uname -sr; grep -iE 'snd|hda' /usr/src/sys/amd64/conf/GENERIC > =3D> > FreeBSD 8.2-STABLE > =20 > uname -sr; grep -iE 'snd|hda' /usr/src/sys/amd64/conf/GENERIC > =3D> > FreeBSD 9.0-STABLE > device snd_es137x # Ensoniq AudioPCI ES137x > device snd_hda # Intel High Definition Audio > device snd_ich # Intel, NVidia and other ICH AC'97= > Audio > device snd_uaudio # USB Audio > device snd_via8233 # VIA VT8233x Audio > > The presence of /boot/kernel/snd_hda.ko in 9 did confuse me. > > | The handbook is an excellent resource if you've never done it. It's > | actually nice to have a minimal kernel config available for any kind > | of testing. Or reboot a few times, it's not that bad! > > That's another thing for me to decide on: as I said, I used to > eliminate building some parts of the kernel but have recently decided > that it might be easier to just use GENERIC -- the resources and sizes > are no longer worth worrying about. > > I have a better understanding of the situation now and will do some > adjustments. > > Thanks, > > -- Alex -- alex-goncharov@comcast.net -- > Sorry, I didn't send my reply until after you had written that you used to modify the kernel. I understand the value in sticking with generic...I've always had machines that needed something added or removed for best function. Given that there's apparently little penalty for module vs. kernel, I can see not including it by default in GENERIC. I do have a laptop that won't make console tones unless snd_hda is NOT loaded, which is odd, but never worth debugging. Thinking bigger picture (beyond sound), would it make sense to keep GENERIC very minimal, but provide an extensive loader.conf with a default install...so most things worked, but were loaded as modules? Matt
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4F3EAE5F.6070903>