[opensuse-kernel] x86_64 space consumption
I understand that capabilities grow, and variety of hardware grows, but some differences among distros are a puzzle. Here are selected size differences: OS 11.4 OS 13.1 OS 15.0 OS TW F30 Deb 10 Kernel Version 3.0.101 3.12.67 4.12.14 4.19.12 4.19.13 4.19.37 /boot/vmlinuz 4.7M 6.1M 6.8M 7.8M 8.3M 5.0M /boot/initrd 6.6M 6.9M 8.3M 8.7M 15.5M 7.2M /lib/modules/ 132.7M 152.7M 257.1M 269.0M 62.5M 252.9M 1-Has anyone upstream or sideways done or announced anything intended to shrink installed module sizes by omitting various classes of rarely useds or neededs, or otherwise, in general use distros? 2-Is the SLE connection to kernels in Leap responsible for extra modules, some that otherwise wouldn't be included in a FOSS distro? 3-How does Fedora get away with so small an installed module size in /lib/? 4-How does Debian get away with so much smaller /boot/vmlinuz, and not so much either in its initrd? All the above are using defaults for whatever the initrds include. How to tell whether hostonly is enabled I don't know how to tell when there is no dracut config to be found in /etc/ anywhere. Fedora has a very much larger extra vmlinuz-0 and initramfs-0 pair used for Grub rescue modes. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org
On 22. 05. 19, 5:01, Felix Miata wrote:
3-How does Fedora get away with so small an installed module size in /lib/?
They use compression. I have just opened bug 1135854. regards, -- js suse labs -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org
Jiri Slaby composed on 2019-05-22 08:35 (UTC+0200):
Felix Miata wrote:
3-How does Fedora get away with so small an installed module size in /lib/?
They use compression. I have just opened bug 1135854.
:-) Apparently they did it in 2014 for Fedora 21 and 3.17 kernel, Rawhide earlier. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org
Good morning, On 2019-05-21 T 23:01 -0400 Felix Miata wrote:
I understand that capabilities grow, and variety of hardware grows, but some differences among distros are a puzzle. Here are selected size differences:
[...]
2-Is the SLE connection to kernels in Leap responsible for extra modules, some that otherwise wouldn't be included in a FOSS distro?
More the opposite: SUSE Linux Enterprise by default ships significantly less modules than openSUSE does, as we split off a package called "kernel-default-extra" which contains modules that a FOSS distro as openSUSE needs/wants to have, but we do not necessarily can declare fully enterprise supported (yet), e.g. kernel modules from "staging". Hope this helps. So long - MgE -- Matthias G. Eckermann, Director Product Management Linux Platforms Phone: +49 331 58 17 63 79 Mobile/DE: +49 17 92 94 94 48 SUSE Linux GmbH -- Maxfeldstrasse 5 -- 90409 Nuernberg -- Germany GF: Felix Imendörffer, Mary Higgins, Sri Rasiah. HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
On Wednesday, 22 May 2019 10:49 Matthias Eckermann wrote:
2-Is the SLE connection to kernels in Leap responsible for extra modules, some that otherwise wouldn't be included in a FOSS distro?
More the opposite: SUSE Linux Enterprise by default ships significantly less modules than openSUSE does, as we split off a package called "kernel-default-extra" which contains modules that a FOSS distro as openSUSE needs/wants to have, but we do not necessarily can declare fully enterprise supported (yet), e.g. kernel modules from "staging".
Even with kernel-default-extra included, there is a lot of modules which we only build for openSUSE kernels, not SLE ones. I have to admit, though, that I expected the ratio to be higher than it is: SLE15 3219 openSUSE-15.0 3921 Tumbleweed 4108 Back to the original question: there are probably be some modules which only make sense in SLE kernels but the number is certainly much lower than number of modules which only make sense in openSUSE. And it's often useful to be able to boot an openSUSE kernel on enterprise hardware for testing purpose. On the other hand, I would agree that we certainly build a lot of modules in openSUSE kernel packages which no openSUSE user actually uses and most likely also quite a few which people couldn't use even if they wanted to (e.g. specific sensor chips which are not used in any x86_64 or i586 system). The hard part is to tell which modules we could drop safely, unfortunately the config option description are rarely helpful. Michal Kubecek -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org
On 5/22/19 7:10 AM, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Wednesday, 22 May 2019 10:49 Matthias Eckermann wrote:
2-Is the SLE connection to kernels in Leap responsible for extra modules, some that otherwise wouldn't be included in a FOSS distro?
More the opposite: SUSE Linux Enterprise by default ships significantly less modules than openSUSE does, as we split off a package called "kernel-default-extra" which contains modules that a FOSS distro as openSUSE needs/wants to have, but we do not necessarily can declare fully enterprise supported (yet), e.g. kernel modules from "staging".
Even with kernel-default-extra included, there is a lot of modules which we only build for openSUSE kernels, not SLE ones. I have to admit, though, that I expected the ratio to be higher than it is:
SLE15 3219 openSUSE-15.0 3921 Tumbleweed 4108
Back to the original question: there are probably be some modules which only make sense in SLE kernels but the number is certainly much lower than number of modules which only make sense in openSUSE. And it's often useful to be able to boot an openSUSE kernel on enterprise hardware for testing purpose.
On the other hand, I would agree that we certainly build a lot of modules in openSUSE kernel packages which no openSUSE user actually uses and most likely also quite a few which people couldn't use even if they wanted to (e.g. specific sensor chips which are not used in any x86_64 or i586 system). The hard part is to tell which modules we could drop safely, unfortunately the config option description are rarely helpful.
What makes this more difficult is that many of these sensors and devices don't *have* to be native to system hardware. There are e.g. USB <-> i2c devices that mean that literally any i2c device could appear on any architecture. Then there are the users who want to run openSUSE on commodity tablets, where these sorts of devices /do/ appear natively. I don't think we should necessarily ship fewer modules but, similar to the discussion about the size of kernel-firmware, we should probably investigate having additional module packages. -Jeff -- Jeff Mahoney SUSE Labs
On Wed, 22 May 2019 18:58:09 +0200, Jeff Mahoney wrote:
On 5/22/19 7:10 AM, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Wednesday, 22 May 2019 10:49 Matthias Eckermann wrote:
2-Is the SLE connection to kernels in Leap responsible for extra modules, some that otherwise wouldn't be included in a FOSS distro?
More the opposite: SUSE Linux Enterprise by default ships significantly less modules than openSUSE does, as we split off a package called "kernel-default-extra" which contains modules that a FOSS distro as openSUSE needs/wants to have, but we do not necessarily can declare fully enterprise supported (yet), e.g. kernel modules from "staging".
Even with kernel-default-extra included, there is a lot of modules which we only build for openSUSE kernels, not SLE ones. I have to admit, though, that I expected the ratio to be higher than it is:
SLE15 3219 openSUSE-15.0 3921 Tumbleweed 4108
Back to the original question: there are probably be some modules which only make sense in SLE kernels but the number is certainly much lower than number of modules which only make sense in openSUSE. And it's often useful to be able to boot an openSUSE kernel on enterprise hardware for testing purpose.
On the other hand, I would agree that we certainly build a lot of modules in openSUSE kernel packages which no openSUSE user actually uses and most likely also quite a few which people couldn't use even if they wanted to (e.g. specific sensor chips which are not used in any x86_64 or i586 system). The hard part is to tell which modules we could drop safely, unfortunately the config option description are rarely helpful.
What makes this more difficult is that many of these sensors and devices don't *have* to be native to system hardware. There are e.g. USB <-> i2c devices that mean that literally any i2c device could appear on any architecture. Then there are the users who want to run openSUSE on commodity tablets, where these sorts of devices /do/ appear natively. I don't think we should necessarily ship fewer modules but, similar to the discussion about the size of kernel-firmware, we should probably investigate having additional module packages.
That's my idea, too. We can start simply splitting to two or three levels per the expected major usages. The choice is difficult, of course, but it's more easily adjustable than on SLE; for openSUSE, it's only a matter of package split and has nothing to do with the support status. thanks, Takashi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org
participants (6)
-
Felix Miata -
Jeff Mahoney -
Jiri Slaby -
Matthias Eckermann -
Michal Kubecek -
Takashi Iwai