Compiling an optimized kernel for VirtualBox or real machines
in [General Linux]
|
From: Balwinder S Dheeman on 15 Dec 2009 09:16 On 12/14/2009 03:29 AM, Grant wrote: > I've been compiling custom kernels for over a decade, and publish the > dmesg and .config on: http://bugsplatter.id.au/kernel/boxen/ -- only > the most recent files are kept. Thanks for sharing the information and above said link :) I have bookmarked it. I'll try your config/scripts and shall get back to you with my findings and, or feedback soon. > Couple years ago there were a few more machines here but I got rid > of older machines and no longer regularly do 2.4 series kernels. I also don't have any such machines, so I can leave the 2.4 and, or older series. > These days I no longer trim to the minimal as memory and CPU speeds > increased. Also, if you perform some benchmarks you'll discover > there's not much performance to be gained. Unless you're working > on embedded systems. Well, that's almost true, but these days I'm making a good use of QEMU and VirtualBox so I prefer reducing the memory and storage requirements to as small as possible. I have some BCM6345, Single-Chip ADSL/CPE Routers http://bit.ly/4AmCEg, on which the dated Boradcom supplied software based on Linux 2.6.8.1 MIPS has but IPv4 capabilities. I wanted to add IPv6 and IPv6 via IPv4 tunnels to these. Warm Regards, -- Balwinder S "bdheeman" Dheeman Registered Linux User: #229709 Anu'z Linux(a)HOME (Unix Shoppe) Machines: #168573, 170593, 259192 Chandigarh, UT, 160062, India Plan9, T2, Arch/Debian/FreeBSD/XP Home: http://werc.homelinux.net/ Visit: http://counter.li.org/
From: Balwinder S Dheeman on 15 Dec 2009 10:03 On 12/14/2009 03:38 AM, Mark Hobley wrote: > Balwinder S Dheeman <bsd.SANSPAM(a)cto.homelinux.net> wrote: >> Hi Mark, >> >> That's really a hilarious news, I shall try testing your kernel soon. > > I am having problems with the build scripts though, because my shell is > bourne compatible, but autotools generates build scripts that do not work on > my ash shell. This has caused a serious delaying to the project, because I am > still reengineering autotools to produce bourne compatible build > scripts. That's the major problem with GNU's autotools, m4, bash and, or other tools and it is a tedious, but momentous job to re-engineer the autotools ;) >> Though, I'm not kernel programmer, but except for the Assembly I can >> hack any C, shell, Qt, GTK, Kconfig and, or Makefile code. I shall feel >> obliged in helping you on that project also. > > I have the opposite problem. I am an assembler language programmer, so I > can do the assembly language stuff, but I am have difficulties with the > C and Makefile code. I did some learning and experimentation in assembler days back in 84, so am quite out of touch these days. >> BTW, I was taking and, or asking for pragmatically creating an optimal >> configuration only for vanilla Linux kernels, so that we may compile >> only a few or needful modules and build an efficient and small kernel >> quickly. > Yeah. I am planning that as part of my project. I plan to build the core > to its smallest size and use loadable modules to expand the functionality > as required. I have documentation on the build options for this. Well, that's where we may/must join hands and, or forces :) -- Balwinder S "bdheeman" Dheeman Registered Linux User: #229709 Anu'z Linux(a)HOME (Unix Shoppe) Machines: #168573, 170593, 259192 Chandigarh, UT, 160062, India Plan9, T2, Arch/Debian/FreeBSD/XP Home: http://werc.homelinux.net/ Visit: http://counter.li.org/
From: Grant on 15 Dec 2009 15:26 On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 19:46:09 +0530, Balwinder S Dheeman <bsd.SANSPAM(a)cto.homelinux.net> wrote: >On 12/14/2009 03:29 AM, Grant wrote: >> I've been compiling custom kernels for over a decade, and publish the >> dmesg and .config on: http://bugsplatter.id.au/kernel/boxen/ -- only >> the most recent files are kept. > >Thanks for sharing the information and above said link :) I have >bookmarked it. I'll try your config/scripts and shall get back to you >with my findings and, or feedback soon. > >> Couple years ago there were a few more machines here but I got rid >> of older machines and no longer regularly do 2.4 series kernels. > >I also don't have any such machines, so I can leave the 2.4 and, or >older series. > >> These days I no longer trim to the minimal as memory and CPU speeds >> increased. Also, if you perform some benchmarks you'll discover >> there's not much performance to be gained. Unless you're working >> on embedded systems. > >Well, that's almost true, but these days I'm making a good use of QEMU >and VirtualBox so I prefer reducing the memory and storage requirements >to as small as possible. Hmm, okay, that's a target worth going for if you want to run lots of VMs. > >I have some BCM6345, Single-Chip ADSL/CPE Routers http://bit.ly/4AmCEg, >on which the dated Boradcom supplied software based on Linux 2.6.8.1 >MIPS has but IPv4 capabilities. I wanted to add IPv6 and IPv6 via IPv4 >tunnels to these. Big ask? That's right into the embedded space where you can trim out lots of kernel stuff. I've not been there, not likely to go there either :) Done enough embedded stuff in 8-bit assembler in the '80s and '90s. Contemplating playing with PIC chips soon -- and they're way too little to run linux. Grant. -- http://bugsplatter.id.au
From: Grant on 15 Dec 2009 16:40
On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 19:46:09 +0530, Balwinder S Dheeman <bsd.SANSPAM(a)cto.homelinux.net> wrote: >On 12/14/2009 03:29 AM, Grant wrote: >> I've been compiling custom kernels for over a decade, and publish the >> dmesg and .config on: http://bugsplatter.id.au/kernel/boxen/ -- only >> the most recent files are kept. > >Thanks for sharing the information and above said link :) I have >bookmarked it. I'll try your config/scripts and shall get back to you >with my findings and, or feedback soon. Another place to look for ideas: http://www.busybox.net/FAQ.html For a minimal system, beyond just shrinking the kernel. Grant. -- http://bugsplatter.id.au |