| To: | Wolfgang Denk <wd@denx.de> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: snapgear and uClinux |
| From: | Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org> |
| Date: | Wed, 12 Nov 2003 21:37:50 +0100 |
| Cc: | David Kesselring <dkesselr@mmc.atmel.com>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org |
| In-reply-to: | <20031112164810.355ECC5F59@atlas.denx.de> |
| Original-recipient: | rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org |
| References: | <Pine.GSO.4.44.0311121132480.5676-100000@ares.mmc.atmel.com> <20031112164810.355ECC5F59@atlas.denx.de> |
| Sender: | linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.4.1i |
On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 05:48:05PM +0100, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > > processor? Did you have any unexpected suprises? Do these tools help get > > the footprint smaller or is it easier to do something with the linux-mips > > tree? > If you have a MMU on your chip you should always go for the "real" Linux. > > Reducing the memory footprint is not so much a kernel issue but one > of the application level - using standard tools linked against glibc > vs. busybox with uClibc for example. Certain mechanism such as copy on write are only possible with an MMU and can achieve dramatic memory savings. The common believe that memory protection results in significant overhead isn't true anymore, so Wolfgang ist certainly right here. Ralf |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | lasat mqpro reboots on "heavy" disk i/o, Florian Lohoff |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Patch for ALI15x3 - Linux-MIPS kernel 2.4.22-rc3, Alan Cox |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: snapgear and uClinux, Wolfgang Denk |
| Next by Thread: | Patch for ALI15x3 - Linux-MIPS kernel 2.4.22-rc3, Jack Miller |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |