Modulized or monolithic kernel on notebooks ?
Hi all, I know, there was a lot of discussion about kernel-builds. And I really do not want start flamewars. So here are my little questions: What do you think (with the the focus on speed): 1. Does it make sense to compile a kernel with all modules built in, for the hardware which is always present on the target notebook (maybe desktop-px, too) ? I.e. sound, controller, filesystem, pcmcia-port, usb, sd-card-reader, wlan etc. etc, everything, which cannot be exchanged. 2. Does this improve speed especially on 64-bit-systems ? 3. Has anyone experience with those tests ? Again: I do not want, to start any flamewars, I am just interested in technics ! Thanks for the answers. Best regards Hans -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Modulized or monolithic kernel on notebooks ?
On 11/30/06 10:06:44AM +0100, Hans-J. Ullrich wrote: Hi all, I know, there was a lot of discussion about kernel-builds. And I really do not want start flamewars. So here are my little questions: What do you think (with the the focus on speed): 1. Does it make sense to compile a kernel with all modules built in, for the hardware which is always present on the target notebook (maybe desktop-px, too) ? I.e. sound, controller, filesystem, pcmcia-port, usb, sd-card-reader, wlan etc. etc, everything, which cannot be exchanged. No, especially considering that USB is one of the worst offenders in the stops my notebook from going to sleep group and the best way to work around that is to unload the USB modules. The only benefit you'll get is that you won't need an initramfs image to boot and the value of that's debatable. And if you ever want to use uswsusp you'll need an initramfs image anyway. 2. Does this improve speed especially on 64-bit-systems ? If there is any difference I guarantee it'll be so small to be well within the margin of error of any benchmarks. Jim. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Modulized or monolithic kernel on notebooks ?
On Thursday 30 November 2006 09:06, Hans-J. Ullrich wrote: Hi all, I know, there was a lot of discussion about kernel-builds. And I really do not want start flamewars. If you ask eight people any question about building kernels, expect to get ten different answers! So here are my little questions: What do you think (with the the focus on speed): 1. Does it make sense to compile a kernel with all modules built in, for the hardware which is always present on the target notebook (maybe desktop-px, too) ? I know from bitter experience that anything to do with sound or USB devices (or for that matter, any slightly flaky hardware) should definitely be compiled as a module. If they go T.U., you can easily cure the problem by unloading and reloading the module. But if you built it hard into the kernel, you're stuck with a dead device till the next boot. That being said, USB seems (qualitatively) more reliable on my 64-bit machine than on my 32-bit ones. I'm still testing to find out whether that's to do with the motherboard or the 2.6 vs. 2.4 kernel. I know of some people who like to install monolithic kernels (and disable module loading) on servers; but that's done for security reasons, not for speed. 2. Does this improve speed especially on 64-bit-systems ? 3. Has anyone experience with those tests ? If there is a speed difference one way or the other, I haven't noticed it. In any case, I would expect the difference only to show at boot time (if you load the modules then) or the first time you plug in the hardware. -- AJS delta echo bravo six four at earthshod dot co dot uk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Modulized or monolithic kernel on notebooks ?
Hans-J. Ullrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi all, I know, there was a lot of discussion about kernel-builds. And I really do not want start flamewars. So here are my little questions: What do you think (with the the focus on speed): Totaly irelevant. It makes no difference in speed. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Modulized or monolithic kernel on notebooks ?
On 11/30/06 10:07:43AM +, A J Stiles wrote: I know of some people who like to install monolithic kernels (and disable module loading) on servers; but that's done for security reasons, not for speed. And those gains are dubious at best, kernel memory can still be altered via /dev/kmem or /dev/mem on most distributions, I think the only one to include any patches to mitigate that is Fedora but I'm not sure. Jim. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
