Re: Patches for REALLY TINY 386 kernels

[Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>]

On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 01:24:41PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Andi Kleen wrote:
> > I was waiting for someone to make that "point" ...
> > 
> >> Every byte you can shave off the compressed kernel image is another
> >> byte you can use for userspace on your FLASH.
> > 
> > Now let's see if that 1MB 386 contains any flash at all. Guesses?  
> > 
> 
> CPUID is hardly something you want to give up for modern embedded stuff.
>  I haven't seen any new embedded stuff using anything less than a 586,
> and even those are disappearing quickly in favor of Geode and VIA.
> 
> However, compressed size reductions as an abstract thing is useful for
> this market.  Just not these particular ones.  The first thing to get
> there is probably an LZMA-based compressor instead of gzip.

That would need more memory again.

Better just write less bloated code. Perhaps mandatory bloatometer
runs during -rc*s for kernels with minimal config with public code pig shame lists
similar to the regression lists are useful. Anyone volunteering?

I suspect there is also much more low hanging fruit of this around.

I don't think eliminating cpuid is a step forward though; that's
just madness.

I killed about 20k in a i386 defconfig kernel in my upcomming patchkit
(and add some other code instead, but not much) so I'm coming out well currently.

-Andi