From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S271228AbTG2ChQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jul 2003 22:37:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S271229AbTG2ChQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jul 2003 22:37:16 -0400 Received: from TYO202.gate.nec.co.jp ([202.32.8.202]:7073 "EHLO TYO202.gate.nec.co.jp") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S271228AbTG2ChL (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jul 2003 22:37:11 -0400 To: Bernardo Innocenti Cc: Nicolas Pitre , Willy Tarreau , Christoph Hellwig , lkml , Alan Cox Subject: Re: Kernel 2.6 size increase References: <200307290102.01313.bernie@develer.com> Reply-To: Miles Bader System-Type: i686-pc-linux-gnu Blat: Foop From: Miles Bader Date: 29 Jul 2003 11:36:01 +0900 In-Reply-To: <200307290102.01313.bernie@develer.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Bernardo Innocenti writes: > > Being able to remove the block layer entirely, just as for the networking > > layer, should be considered too, since none of ramfs, tmpfs, nfs, smbfs, > > jffs and jffs2 just to name those ones actually need the block layer to > > operate. This is really a big pile of dead code in many embedded setups. > > It's a great idea. Yup. When I've used a debugger to trace through the kernel reading a block on a system using only romfs, it's utterly amazing how much completely unnecessary stuff happens. Of course it's a lot harder to find a clean way to make it optional than it is to complain about it ... :-) -Miles -- I have seen the enemy, and he is us. -- Pogo