Michael O'Keefe wrote:
Doesn't the kernel load only modules that *it* thinks are needed based
on a scan of the hardware at boot time? You can always remove modules
one at a time and see what happens. Lsmod shows dependencies if
anything else is using a given module, so I'd say you can rule those
out right off.
yes, but you're left with a kernel that has hooks in it for hardware
that you will NEVER use. If you want to reduce the memory footprint of
the kernel (this was always my goal) you remove those unnecessary module
hooks.
I was only looking at a few hints on what was needed vs. what may not
be. Things listed in lsmod might be a good indicator of what is needed
on the running system. Then go thru menuconfig and weed out all but
those modules. I suspect that most distros nowadays are pretty good at
paring down the kernel, leaving out the esoteric stuff.
Are any "Hooks" really using substantial system resources on a typical
PC or laptop? I thought the whole point of the kernel config file was
that if something was listed as a module (i.e. not to be compiled into
the kernel proper), then anything neither compiled in nor marked as
loadable was ignored by the kernel. And any module that was not needed
at boot was not loaded (thus not using resources - other than drive space).
I suspect that hooks inside the kernel to whatever modules might have
been, but were not, loaded is trivial in terms of code size, and
probably far outweighed by the size of any unused module files and
drivers extant on the HDD.
--
Best Regards,
~DJA.
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
