You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
I should probably read Linux Kernel in a nut shell but I didn't have the time yet! Is there some improvement in building certain feature or driver inside the kernel instead of module? For example if I now that my machine has a Broadcom B43 wireless, should I build it into the kernel instead of module?
Offline
There shouldn't be difference in performance.
Ah, good taste! What a dreadful thing! Taste is the enemy of creativeness.
Picasso
Perfection is reached, not when there is no longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away.
Saint Exupéry
Offline
Merci!
Any difference also in boot time?
Offline
Merci!
Any difference also in boot time?
I don't think that you would notice any. It would technically be a bit faster if it was compiled in, but loading a single module hardly takes any time.
Offline
If you compile modules that are needed for booting (such as filesystem modules) into the kernel, then you don't have to use an initrd image. This can speed your bootup a little (a few seconds for me).
What I've done for my current kernel is compile into the kernel the majority of modules that are always loaded anyway (wireless, USB, iptables etc) with a few left as modules that only get used rarely (NTFS, VFAT) or might be required in the future (all the crypto modules). There shouldn't really be much of a difference, but it just feels cleaner to me to have fewer modules Of course, one advantage of leaving stuff as modules is that it becomes easy to load/unload/block certain modules.
flack 2.0.6: menu-driven BASH script to easily tag FLAC files (AUR)
knock-once 1.2: BASH script to easily create/send one-time sequences for knockd (forum/AUR)
Offline
Thanks Dyscordia,
This is exactly what I was planning to do. For now the test that I made with my kernel didn't show a lot of performance improvement compare to the generic Kernel. Maybe the system is a little more reactive but it's hard to notice.
Happy to have someone that confirm my thought!
Offline
Pages: 1