Re: kernel-compiling, when should components be compiled as modules?
Thanks for your email. Therefore, is it generally safe to compile
everything as a module (given that the option exists)?
On Mon, Apr 02, 2001 at 02:43:52PM -0600, Jimmy Richards wrote:
> Hi Bryan,
> The main advantage is the when you compile something as a module it does not
> take up any memory unless it gets loaded by the kernel. If you compile
> something into the kernel then it gets loaded into memory as part of the
> kernel since it is part of the kernel. For instance, you could have 15 things
> as modules and when you boot into linux only five of them are loaded because
> they are needed. The other 10 wait until you need them. If you load up a vfat
> module, it then takes up some memory. If you never call upon the vfat module,
> that much less memory is taken up by kernel code. A smaller kernel memory
> footprint if you will, is the advantage. Some kernel modules/drivers may take
> up some resources other than just memory too.
> Hope that helps explain it a little,
> Jimmy Richards
> On Monday 02 April 2001 14:12, Bryan Walton wrote:
> > I am sure that there are many different ideas on this topic, and would like
> > to here people's thoughts. When compiling kernels, I can compile many
> > things into the kernel. But I often have the option to compile many things
> > as a module.
> > What are the pros and cons of compiling things as modules? Should I
> > stay away from that? Should I always compile as a module if the option is
> > available? Ideas?
> > Thanks,
> > Bryan Walton
Bryan K. Walton Network Operations Center Analyst
Berbee...putting the E in business http://www.berbee.com/
GPG fingerprint: BF68 340D A650 E2D7 86B9 FED5 DDFF 3EEE 3229 7B5D