I am sorry to read your mail so late. My module had been a proprietary driver so that I requested to strip it and got small size driver. Thank you for attention. > -----Original Message----- > From: Arnd Bergmann [mailto:arnd@xxxxxxxx] > Sent: Friday, January 03, 2014 10:24 PM > To: linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux; HyoJun Im; linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx; Gioh Kim > Subject: Re: ARM: mm: Could I change module space size or place modules in > vmalloc area? > > On Friday 03 January 2014, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 01:10:09PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > Aside from the good comments that Russell made, I would remark that > > > the fact that you need multiple megabytes worth of modules indicates > > > that you are doing something wrong. Can you point to a git tree > > > containing those modules? > > > > From the comments which have been made, one point that seems to have > > been identified is that if this module is first stripped and then > > loaded, it can load, but if it's unstripped, it's too big. This > > sounds suboptimal to me - the debug info shouldn't be loaded into the > kernel. > > Reading the layout_and_allocate() function, that is probably the intention > already, and if something goes wrong there on ARM, it could be fixed up in > an arch specific module_frob_arch_sections() function. > > > However, I guess there's bad interactions with module signing if you > > don't do this and the module was signed with the debug info present, > > so I don't think there's a good solution for this. > > My point was another anyway: I can't think of any good reason why you > would end up with this many modules on any sane system. The only cases > I've seen so far are > > - modules written in C++, with libstdc++ linked into the module > - a closed-source platform port hidden in a loadable module that > contains all the device drivers and subsystems while ignoring the > infrastructure we have in the kernel, and the possible legal > implications. > - a bug in the module using large arrays that should just be > dynamically allocated. > - device firmware statically linked into the module rather than > loaded using request_firmware. > > In each of these cases, the real answer is to fix the code they are trying > to load to do things in a more common way, especially if the intention is > to eventually merge the code upstream. It is of course possible that they > are indeed trying something valid, that's why I asked to see the source > code. > > Arnd -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>