Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 12:38:17 +0000 From: Attilio Rao <attilio@freebsd.org> To: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@leidinger.net> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Custom kernel poll summary (was: Re: Reducing the need to compile a custom kernel) Message-ID: <CAJ-FndBTPfPvGrCJfJU7PAGpJ02=GF1QzHX98n=StEKpPJ-6kA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20120214123755.Horde.WkLNcJjmRSRPOkeTw7bUClA@webmail.leidinger.net> References: <20120210145604.Horde.ewjpSpjmRSRPNSH0YRHxgAk@webmail.leidinger.net> <20120214123755.Horde.WkLNcJjmRSRPOkeTw7bUClA@webmail.leidinger.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
2012/2/14, Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@leidinger.net>: > Quoting Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> (from Fri, 10 > Feb 2012 14:56:04 +0100): > >> Such a kernel would cover situations where people compile their own >> kernel because they want to get rid of some unused kernel code (and >> maybe even need the memory this frees up). >> >> The question is, is this enough? Or asked differently, why are you >> compiling a custom kernel in a production environment (so I rule out >> debug options zhich are not enabled in GENERIC)? Are there options >> which you add which you can not add as a module (SW_WATCHDOG comes >> to my mind)? If yes, which ones and how important are they for you? > > Here is what I got, the first column is the number of requests, the > second what is requested, and the 3rd my comments (basically it means, > if there is a comment, it is not needed/possible to include in a > modular kernel): ... > 2 SW_WATCHDOG This can become a module with very little effort I guess. Thanks, Attilio -- Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-FndBTPfPvGrCJfJU7PAGpJ02=GF1QzHX98n=StEKpPJ-6kA>