Andi Kleen wrote:
On Thursday 19 July 2007 13:13:40 Alan Cox wrote:
- It's not only code, it also bloats everyone's kernel image.
Its a miniscule piece of code that is discarded on boot. Yes it might
make the image 100 bytes longer, but have you priced a 160GB disk
recently. I don't think 100
On Thursday 19 July 2007 13:13:40 Alan Cox wrote:
> > - It's not only code, it also bloats everyone's kernel image.
>
> Its a miniscule piece of code that is discarded on boot. Yes it might
> make the image 100 bytes longer, but have you priced a 160GB disk
> recently. I don't think 100 bytes of
> - It's not only code, it also bloats everyone's kernel image.
Its a miniscule piece of code that is discarded on boot. Yes it might
make the image 100 bytes longer, but have you priced a 160GB disk
recently. I don't think 100 bytes of disk and 0 of memory really is worth
saving for any risk at
On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 11:45:29AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Googling for the printk string "CPU: Rise iDragon" didn't find any dmesg
> > available online.
> >
> > If it turns out that against all expectations there are actually users
> > reverting this patch would be easy.
> >
> > This patch
> Googling for the printk string "CPU: Rise iDragon" didn't find any dmesg
> available online.
>
> If it turns out that against all expectations there are actually users
> reverting this patch would be easy.
>
> This patch will make the kernel images smaller by a few bytes for all
> i386 users.
From: Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The Rise CPUs were only very short-lived, and there are no reports of
anyone both owning one and running Linux on it.
Googling for the printk string "CPU: Rise iDragon" didn't find any dmesg
available online.
If it turns out that against all expectations
From: Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Rise CPUs were only very short-lived, and there are no reports of
anyone both owning one and running Linux on it.
Googling for the printk string CPU: Rise iDragon didn't find any dmesg
available online.
If it turns out that against all expectations there
Googling for the printk string CPU: Rise iDragon didn't find any dmesg
available online.
If it turns out that against all expectations there are actually users
reverting this patch would be easy.
This patch will make the kernel images smaller by a few bytes for all
i386 users.
Why
On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 11:45:29AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
Googling for the printk string CPU: Rise iDragon didn't find any dmesg
available online.
If it turns out that against all expectations there are actually users
reverting this patch would be easy.
This patch will make the
- It's not only code, it also bloats everyone's kernel image.
Its a miniscule piece of code that is discarded on boot. Yes it might
make the image 100 bytes longer, but have you priced a 160GB disk
recently. I don't think 100 bytes of disk and 0 of memory really is worth
saving for any risk at
On Thursday 19 July 2007 13:13:40 Alan Cox wrote:
- It's not only code, it also bloats everyone's kernel image.
Its a miniscule piece of code that is discarded on boot. Yes it might
make the image 100 bytes longer, but have you priced a 160GB disk
recently. I don't think 100 bytes of disk
Andi Kleen wrote:
On Thursday 19 July 2007 13:13:40 Alan Cox wrote:
- It's not only code, it also bloats everyone's kernel image.
Its a miniscule piece of code that is discarded on boot. Yes it might
make the image 100 bytes longer, but have you priced a 160GB disk
recently. I don't think 100
12 matches
Mail list logo
