From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754760AbYABM04 (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Jan 2008 07:26:56 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752600AbYABM0q (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Jan 2008 07:26:46 -0500 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.174]:52413 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752133AbYABM0p (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Jan 2008 07:26:45 -0500 Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 13:26:10 +0100 (CET) From: Bodo Eggert <7eggert@gmx.de> To: Herbert Xu cc: Theodore Tso , 7eggert@gmx.de, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, davem@davemloft.net, jengelh@computergmbh.de, devzero@web.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bunk@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Force UNIX domain sockets to be built in In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=us-ascii X-be10.7eggert.dyndns.org-MailScanner-Information: See www.mailscanner.info for information X-be10.7eggert.dyndns.org-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-be10.7eggert.dyndns.org-MailScanner-From: 7eggert@gmx.de X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1++uJD59AhYAWB2XBZ9LzIgcqcBbGy7ygI4L8b QMcG+r+uo7/91Vop7QHk2Wv2/12fODnFQ7y15Fhj4wntWPxmQU DsVZxesTSPlWTYu7pPTWQ== Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2 Jan 2008, Herbert Xu wrote: > Theodore Tso wrote: > > The question is whether the size of the Unix domain sockets support is > > worth the complexity of yet another config option that we expose to > > the user. For the embedded world, OK, maybe they want to save 14k of > > non-swappable memory. But for the non-embedded world, given the 117k > > mandatory memory usage of sysfs, or the 124k memory usage of the core > > networking stack, never mind the 3 megabytes of memory used by objects > > in the kernel subdirectory, it's not clear that it's worth worrying > > over 14k of memory, especially when many Unix programs assume > > that Unix Domain Sockets are present. > > That would make sense if we were proposing to get rid of the CONFIG_UNIX > question altogether for !CONFIG_EMBEDDED. Exactly this is what my patch does: The question is not to be displayed unless EMBEDDED, and the default is changed to y. > However, the proposal here is > merely to eliminate the modular option but the CONFIG_UNIX prompt itself > will remain even without CONFIG_EMBEDDED. > > This I think is quite pointless. That's what another patch would do. I decided that s/tristate/bool/ is something completely different from adding the default and hiding the option, and that I'd avoid this discussion by not eliminating UNIX=m. -- Top 100 things you don't want the sysadmin to say: 96. That's SOOOOO bizarre.