From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Josh Triplett Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 2/3] fs: Make core dump functionality optional Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2012 08:01:57 -0700 Message-ID: <20120810150157.GA23457@leaf> References: <1344587169-18682-1-git-send-email-alex.page.kelly@gmail.com> <1344587169-18682-2-git-send-email-alex.page.kelly@gmail.com> <20120810132323.GA21048@sergelap> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Alex Kelly , Alexander Viro , Heiko Carstens , "Eric W. Biederman" , "Paul E. McKenney" , Andrew Morton , Ingo Molnar , Kees Cook , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Serge Hallyn Return-path: Received: from relay4-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.196]:41474 "EHLO relay4-d.mail.gandi.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758269Ab2HJPCG (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Aug 2012 11:02:06 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120810132323.GA21048@sergelap> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 08:23:23AM -0500, Serge Hallyn wrote: > Quoting Alex Kelly (alex.page.kelly@gmail.com): > > Adds an expert Kconfig option, CONFIG_COREDUMP, which allows disabling of core dump. > > This saves approximately 2.6k in the compiled kernel, and complements CONFIG_ELF_CORE, > > which now depends on it. > > Is there another reason than the 2.6k to do this? My kernels range > between 4.8 and 5M, so that's .05% size savings? A kitchen-sink kernel might take up that much space, but you can build a minimal embedded kernel that only takes up ~200k, at which point 2.6k represents a >1% decrease. Add a few more changes like this, and those decreases start to add up. At this point, no one thing you can chop out of the kernel will give you a 100k decrease by itself; you need a pile of changes like this one to do that. - Josh Triplett