[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Generating a cloud / VM kernel package

On 08/26/2017 12:15 PM, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> a) we need to decide then if we need one kernel flavour for each cloud
> provider or if we can agree on a basic set of kernel compile options
> that every cloud provider can use.

I don't think that's needed at all.

> b) most kernels Debian ships are kernels that have most drivers needed
> as modules, so even though the kernel images are big, the kernel should
> only load modules it really needs.

Size is a concern, yes. Having too many modules slows down all sorts of
things. I'm not sure, but aren't all modules added to the initrd by default?

> Thomas, can you elaborate why you think this a good idea? Is this about
> boot time of the kernel image? The thing I really do not want to have is
> additional kernel source uploads to the archive for just those cloud
> kernel images, but you already considered that a bad idea (from what I
> read between your lines).

Basically, the only thing that I want to see is a specific config for
that kernel, nothing else. Otherwise, it's going to be too much
maintenance work. Indeed, it should *not* be a different source upload,
that's too much work as well. There also may be some optimization that
we could do.

Also, I don't see this happening without a prior agreement from the
kernel team (which means probably that Ben has to agree). On our side,
we could prepare a list of kernel modules that we do *not* want.


Thomas Goirand (zigo)

Reply to: