LinuxQuestions.org
Review your favorite Linux distribution.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 06-02-2005, 12:01 PM   #1
kornerr
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2004
Location: Russia, Siberia, Kemerovo
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 893

Rep: Reputation: 35
What's the size of your kernel?


My "linux-2.4.26" is 972855 bytes long [950K].
 
Old 06-02-2005, 12:23 PM   #2
DrOzz
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2003
Location: Sydney, Nova Scotia, Canada
Distribution: slackware
Posts: 4,185

Rep: Reputation: 59
you should be posting something like this in General forum.
mine is 1.7 megs just to answer your question.
 
Old 06-02-2005, 12:26 PM   #3
trickykid
Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2001
Posts: 24,133

Rep: Reputation: 197Reputation: 197
Moved... more suitable in General, not a Linux technical question, more of a survey type question.

Which one... I have 5 of them on 5 machines.. I could include the one's from work as well if you'd like...
 
Old 06-02-2005, 12:31 PM   #4
kornerr
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2004
Location: Russia, Siberia, Kemerovo
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 893

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 35
Quote:
Which one... I have 5 of them on 5 machines.. I could include the one's from work as well if you'd like...
All I'm just curious about this.
 
Old 06-02-2005, 12:31 PM   #5
harken
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Between the chair and the desk
Distribution: Debian Sarge, kernel 2.6.13
Posts: 666

Rep: Reputation: 30
1.2 MB, but I think that I could bring it under 1 MB...I think I included 4 or 5 unnecessary modules.
 
Old 06-02-2005, 12:33 PM   #6
trickykid
Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2001
Posts: 24,133

Rep: Reputation: 197Reputation: 197
Quote:
Originally posted by harken
1.2 MB, but I think that I could bring it under 1 MB...I think I included 4 or 5 unnecessary modules.
Modules aren't included in that total size.. that's why they are modules, they are separate from the actual vmlinuz image you have..
 
Old 06-02-2005, 04:35 PM   #7
cereal83
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Canada
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 478

Rep: Reputation: 30
Quote:
Originally posted by trickykid
Modules aren't included in that total size.. that's why they are modules, they are separate from the actual vmlinuz image you have..

I love it when people say that thinking that they are accually right.

Mine is 1.4 Megz on work comp. My Dual Xeon is 1.45. Both have scsi support and mine has a whole bunch of extra stuff because I test stuff on here. To make mine under 1 meg. I had to take out support for basically everything except the essentials to boot so I dunno how people do it.
 
Old 06-02-2005, 05:40 PM   #8
masonm
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2003
Location: Following the white rabbit
Distribution: Slackware64 13.37 Android 4.0
Posts: 2,248

Rep: Reputation: 46
This [<---------------------------------------------------------->] big.
 
Old 06-02-2005, 05:47 PM   #9
scuzzman
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Location: Hilliard, Ohio, USA
Distribution: Slackware, Kubuntu
Posts: 1,851

Rep: Reputation: 47
1576214 bytes
 
Old 06-02-2005, 08:02 PM   #10
trickykid
Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2001
Posts: 24,133

Rep: Reputation: 197Reputation: 197
Quote:
Originally posted by cereal83

I love it when people say that thinking that they are accually right.
Not sure what you mean but a quick google search even brought up an excellent explanation of modules and will tell how and why they are not included in the total size of a kernel for many reasons:

"As operating systems evolve and grow over time, the designers of the system face a dilemma. If support for all possible functionality is included within the operating system kernel, the core program that controls the system, the kernel becomes very large and unwieldy. If support for the functionality is not included in the kernel, the functions will either work too slowly or won't work at all. Operating system designers typically solve this dilemma by modularizing support for functionality that can then be included or left out.

Traditionally, there are two ways to provide this modularity. The designer can separate functionality into separate processes called threads or the kernel can be recompiled to include/exclude any functions (not) included by the vendor. If the functionality is separated into threads, the kernel is called a micro-kernel. This solution imposes communications overhead as the threads coordinate their work. A kernel that has all of its functionality included when it is built is called a monolithic kernel. As the name implies, the downside of this solution is the size of the kernel. Linux' solution was to include kernel modules which can be loaded and unloaded on demand. This minimizes both kernel size and communication overhead."


-source John Holmwood http://www.linuxgazette.com/book/print/5752

I do love it when I'm right the first time and shouldn't have to explain myself or prove it..

Last edited by trickykid; 06-02-2005 at 08:05 PM.
 
Old 06-02-2005, 08:25 PM   #11
finegan
Guru
 
Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 5,700

Rep: Reputation: 57
Quote:
Originally posted by cereal83

I love it when people say that thinking that they are accually right.

Mine is 1.4 Megz on work comp. My Dual Xeon is 1.45. Both have scsi support and mine has a whole bunch of extra stuff because I test stuff on here. To make mine under 1 meg. I had to take out support for basically everything except the essentials to boot so I dunno how people do it.
Older gcc, get 100k out of using an earlier 3.x series.

I recently had to cramb basically every NIC, most scsi drivers, and reiserfs, ext3, all in 1.3 Meg static no-mods. That's a pain. Doing it again under 2.6... just wasn't happenin, hard enough modularizing the scsi mods, the FS mods (leaving in ext2), and needing ramfs and tmpfs support isn't small... one of the better tricks, compile i586, yank out the extra schedulers, and drop support for all binaries but ELF (unless you really need em). Anyway, between gcc type, kernel source, and no kidding... filesystem needs (drop XFS, you shed 200k!!!), at all gets kinda arbitrary.

Cheers,

Finegan
 
Old 06-03-2005, 12:43 AM   #12
cs-cam
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Location: Australia
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 3,544
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 56
Mine is just over 2MB I think.
 
Old 06-03-2005, 01:24 AM   #13
AlexV
Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Location: New Lenox, IL
Distribution: Fedora Core 4; Ubuntu 5.10 (Breezy Preview); CentOS 4
Posts: 81

Rep: Reputation: 15
Re: What's the size of your kernel?

Quote:
Originally posted by kornerr
My "linux-2.4.26" is 972855 bytes long [950K].
1188342 bytes.

Ha! My kernel is bigger than your kernel! You're such a loser

Or is it the other way around? Hmm...
 
Old 06-03-2005, 02:35 AM   #14
harken
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Between the chair and the desk
Distribution: Debian Sarge, kernel 2.6.13
Posts: 666

Rep: Reputation: 30
Quote:
Originally posted by trickykid
Modules aren't included in that total size.. that's why they are modules, they are separate from the actual vmlinuz image you have..
Oops, sorry, I knew that but what I actually ment was that I compiled into the kernel some drivers that could've been compiled as modules, thus resulting a smaller kernel.
I'm well aware of the difference between modules and vmlinuz because when I first started compiling kernels, due to my lack of knowledge, I had to recompile at least 3-4 times/kernel because of some unchecked option... Oh well, that's past now.

Last edited by harken; 06-03-2005 at 02:36 AM.
 
Old 06-03-2005, 09:27 AM   #15
kornerr
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2004
Location: Russia, Siberia, Kemerovo
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 893

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 35
Quote:
Ha! My kernel is bigger than your kernel! You're such a loser
AFAIK, the smaller the kernel - the better
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
what is my kernel size ??? b0nd Linux - Newbie 3 09-16-2005 08:31 AM
Kernel size ghight Linux - Software 2 10-22-2004 02:56 PM
how to know size of kernel govindabkari Linux - Software 3 08-25-2004 02:43 AM
2.6.6 Kernel size plan9 Slackware 1 06-08-2004 01:04 PM
kernel size Nerun Linux - General 4 02-20-2002 11:09 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:08 AM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration