Val Henson wrote:
> Have you seen Graham Stoney's cool new dead function removing patch? It
> seems like a really good way to optimize out unused code without having
> to ifdef/config things quite so much.
Yes, but I won't think it would remove the swapping code just because
I never enabled swapping in the boot sequence. All references to the
swapping code would have to be removed.
> On the other hand, if you submitted a
> patch implementing swapping as a config option, it would almost certainly
> get accepted since there seems to be quite a number of people who don't
> want or need swap.
I've been told that the swapping code is heavily integrated with the
virtual managment code, so I guess it would be difficult and/or too
many #ifdefs in the code to be acceptable.
I'm still interested in a stripped-down mm subsystem more tuned for
embedded systems, but it'll have to wait for later.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to email@example.com
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 30 2000 - 21:00:14 EST