LinuxQuestions.org
Did you know LQ has a Linux Hardware Compatibility List?
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Software
User Name
Password
Linux - Software This forum is for Software issues.
Having a problem installing a new program? Want to know which application is best for the job? Post your question in this forum.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 01-02-2009, 12:31 PM   #1
boler
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2008
Location: London
Distribution: Slackware 13.37
Posts: 38

Rep: Reputation: 16
Optimizing the Kernel - Loadable Module Support Option?


Hi, I'm in the process of configuring my kernel compile options for 2.6.28.

Is there a performance advantage in disabling Loadable Module Support and compiling all kernel options / drivers I require in the main kernel?

It just seems intuitive to me that if the drivers are in the core kernel performance / reliability will be better but I have no information to back this up.

Also I don't mind compiling a new kernel every time I want to change hardware etc.

Thanks in advance.
 
Old 01-02-2009, 03:02 PM   #2
MS3FGX
Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2004
Location: NJ, USA
Distribution: Slackware, Debian
Posts: 5,852

Rep: Reputation: 351Reputation: 351Reputation: 351Reputation: 351
You will get better performance with a monolithic kernel than you would when using modules. If nothing else, you will be saving the disk I/O required to load the modules into the kernel.

The downside is that the kernel will become larger the more things you add in. This can be a problem if the kernel becomes so large it no longer fits in the MBR (such as if you were booting with LILO). Though you would need to include quite a few modules before that happened.

A safe compromise is to build in all of the modules you absolutely need, and then leave loadable module support enabled (along with the compiled source for your kernel). Then, down the line, if you want to play around with some particular module or function (say virtual tunnels or a USB device) you can quickly compile and install the module for it without having to replace the whole kernel (or even reboot).

Just having modules on the machine and leaving module support enabled is not going to cause any loss in performance, so long as your required support is built in. You would only be using modules when you actually required them, rather than full time.
 
  


Reply

Tags
config, kernel, module


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
Use of -Wall option in CFLAGS while make for a loadable module Ashok_mittal Linux - Newbie 1 01-18-2008 06:32 AM
Help, loadable kernel module . ERBRMN Linux - General 3 10-13-2006 07:34 AM
RedHat 9 (2.4.20-8) kernel rebuild without loadable module support RedHatDude Linux - Software 4 09-09-2003 09:32 PM
RedHat 9 (2.4.20-8) kernel rebuild without loadable module support RedHatDude Red Hat 1 09-09-2003 09:20 PM
loadable kernel module brajesh Linux - General 2 01-17-2003 12:54 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:57 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