From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pb0-f50.google.com (mail-pb0-f50.google.com [209.85.160.50]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 435786B007B for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 02:38:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pb0-f50.google.com with SMTP id md12so658400pbc.37 for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 23:38:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lgeamrelo04.lge.com (lgeamrelo04.lge.com. [156.147.1.127]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id po10si1308096pab.73.2014.03.11.23.38.41 for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 23:38:43 -0700 (PDT) From: "Gioh Kim" References: <002001cf07a1$fd4bdc10$f7e39430$@lge.com> <201401031310.09930.arnd@arndb.de> <20140103122206.GK7383@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <201401031423.55336.arnd@arndb.de> In-Reply-To: <201401031423.55336.arnd@arndb.de> Subject: RE: ARM: mm: Could I change module space size or place modules in vmalloc area? Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 15:38:39 +0900 Message-ID: <000501cf3dbd$b49ac970$1dd05c50$@lge.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ks_c_5601-1987" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: ko Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: 'Arnd Bergmann' , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Cc: 'Russell King - ARM Linux' , =?ks_c_5601-1987?B?wMywx8ij?= , linux-mm@kvack.org I am sorry to read your mail so late. My module had been a proprietary driver so that I requested to strip it and got small size driver. Thank you for attention. > -----Original Message----- > From: Arnd Bergmann [mailto:arnd@arndb.de] > Sent: Friday, January 03, 2014 10:24 PM > To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux; HyoJun Im; linux-mm@kvack.org; Gioh Kim > Subject: Re: ARM: mm: Could I change module space size or place modules in > vmalloc area? > > On Friday 03 January 2014, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 01:10:09PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > Aside from the good comments that Russell made, I would remark that > > > the fact that you need multiple megabytes worth of modules indicates > > > that you are doing something wrong. Can you point to a git tree > > > containing those modules? > > > > From the comments which have been made, one point that seems to have > > been identified is that if this module is first stripped and then > > loaded, it can load, but if it's unstripped, it's too big. This > > sounds suboptimal to me - the debug info shouldn't be loaded into the > kernel. > > Reading the layout_and_allocate() function, that is probably the intention > already, and if something goes wrong there on ARM, it could be fixed up in > an arch specific module_frob_arch_sections() function. > > > However, I guess there's bad interactions with module signing if you > > don't do this and the module was signed with the debug info present, > > so I don't think there's a good solution for this. > > My point was another anyway: I can't think of any good reason why you > would end up with this many modules on any sane system. The only cases > I've seen so far are > > - modules written in C++, with libstdc++ linked into the module > - a closed-source platform port hidden in a loadable module that > contains all the device drivers and subsystems while ignoring the > infrastructure we have in the kernel, and the possible legal > implications. > - a bug in the module using large arrays that should just be > dynamically allocated. > - device firmware statically linked into the module rather than > loaded using request_firmware. > > In each of these cases, the real answer is to fix the code they are trying > to load to do things in a more common way, especially if the intention is > to eventually merge the code upstream. It is of course possible that they > are indeed trying something valid, that's why I asked to see the source > code. > > Arnd -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org