On Saturday, 14 July 2007 10:33, david@xxxxxxx wrote: > by the way, a data point on kernel sizes > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 864648 Jul 14 00:53 vmlinuz.2.6.22.1.hibernate > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 659496 Jul 14 01:17 vmlinuz.2.6.22.1.hibernate.stripped > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3948168 Jul 14 01:10 vmlinuz.2.6.22.1.running > > the running one matches the config I'm running on my home server, the > hibernate is a pretty stripped down version, and the stripped is close to > a minimum (including turning off printk and BUG()). All three are with all > drivers built-in, no module support. > > this is on a amd64 64 bit system > > configs are available if anyone cares, the point is how much smaller a > kernel could be if it doesn't need all the stuff that you put in your main > kernel. In my case this includes not enabling the 3-ware card that holds > my 12-disk raid array, instead the hibernate image would be stored on one > of the scsi drives attached to the adaptec 78xx card. > > I expect that on a normal desktop/laptop with more features (like sound) > the savings could be even more significant But the kernel needs some data to work too (a 'struct page' for each memory page etc.). Greetings, Rafael -- "Premature optimization is the root of all evil." - Donald Knuth _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
