linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: snapgear and uClinux

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>