Re: 2.6.1-rc1-tiny2

[Nick Piggin <piggin@cyberone.com.au>]

Matt Mackall wrote:

>
>I like this stuff, but I think the first two bits are probably better
>done in mainline proper, perhaps Andrew will consider them now that
>2.6.0 is out. The -tiny approach is to make small tweaks on stuff
>without diverging far from the mainline infrastructure. I'm trying to
>keep most of the patches independent. I've basically already hacked my
>owned version of the third bit (cpu support code selection) in an
>earlier -tiny release, hadn't noticed the mtrr bits yet.
>

The problem is, you aren't supposed to remove *any* cpu support code
with the current scheme unless the kernel is definitely not supposed
to run on that cpu. So a selection of 386 means you have to keep everything.
This gets a bit hairy when you select eg. Pentium 4, and try to work
out whether K7 should be supported or not...

Which is where Adrian's scheme comes in. I guess there are still probably
a lot of other things with better complexity/size saving ratio though,
but I would also like to see it in 2.6.