Re: [RFC] ELF Relocatable x86 and x86_64 bzImages

[Dave Jones]

On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 05:14:37PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:

 > I guess the practical question is do people see a real performance benefit
 > when loading the kernel at 4MB?

Linus claimed lmbench saw some huge wins. Others showed that for eg,
a kernel compile took the same amount of time, so take from that what you will..

 > Possibly the right solution is to do like I did on x86_64 and simply remove
 > CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START, and always place the kernel at 4MB, or something like
 > that.
 > 
 > The practical question is what to do to keep the complexity from spinning
 > out of control.  Removing CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START would seriously help with
 > that.

Given the two primary uses of that option right now are a) the aforementioned
perf win and b) building kexec kernels, I doubt anyone would miss it once
we go relocatable ;-)

		Dave

-- 
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/