Re: [PATCH 0/2] do not select KALLSYMS_ALL

[Paulo Marques]

Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 17:56 +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
>> Well, ok, I've measured how much is this "a lot". On an embedded arm
>> platform this makes the kernel only 1.5% larger. 
> 
> But in absolute numbers this is 70KiB in my case, which is indeed
> considerable amount. So, I agree that it makes sense to keep this as a
> separate option.

Yes, and this depends a lot on the kernel configuration options you've
selected (and that 1.5% of the kernel size, might be 50%~100% of the
kallsyms table).

IIRC, I had configurations where the KALLSYMS_ALL option was increasing
the kallsyms table from something like 150kB to above 500kB (before
compression). This was a long time ago though and I can't say exactly
what was the configuration that made this happen.

As for the CONFIG_KALLSYMS_EXTRA_PASS, I think the original idea (it was
not mine) was that it should be off by default and then the user would
need to turn it on when something went wrong.

With an automatic makefile mechanism, the problem would go unnoticed and
it just wouldn't be fixed, increasing the kernel compile time for
everyone who hits the same troublesome configuration.

-- 
Paulo Marques - www.grupopie.com

"As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error."
Weisert

--
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/