From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 08:00:29 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 08:00:19 -0500 Received: from samba.sourceforge.net ([198.186.203.85]:6930 "HELO lists.samba.org") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 08:00:11 -0500 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:59:19 +1100 From: Anton Blanchard To: Marko Kentt?l? Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Kernel memory usage optimisations? Message-ID: <20011219125919.GD24009@krispykreme> In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20011219144636.03498a10@mail.teraflops.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20011219144636.03498a10@mail.teraflops.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.24i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > I understand that best area for saving memory usage is the C-library but > are there any other kernel areas? I'm thinking of dropping swapfile support > and maybe some other subsystems that are not needed in embedded device. Check out all the cacheline_aligned usage, in all the cases I could see there was no reason to do this on a UP machine. You could probably get away with redefining them to do nothing. Also you could drop the sizes of the hashes (dentry, inode, mount, buffer, page, route) if they are taking up RAM. Anton