Subject: Re: LKMs (was Re: IPSEC in GENERIC)
To: None <tech-kern@NetBSD.org>
From: Valeriy E. Ushakov <uwe@ptc.spbu.ru>
List: tech-kern
Date: 02/20/2006 18:47:38
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 06:41:59 -0800, Garrett D'Amore wrote:

> performance of binary linked vs. static will vary from platform to
> platform, but yes, I think generally the benefits outweigh the
> costs.  IMO.

And given that to access driver or filesystem code the kernel already
uses function pointers anyway, I'm not even sure there is any
performance penalty after the LKM is loaded.  The code is not PIC, it
needs to be relocated before being loaded (that's why we need ld(1)
for LKMs) into the kernel, so there's no PIC indirection price to
pay).

SY, Uwe
-- 
uwe@ptc.spbu.ru                         |       Zu Grunde kommen
http://snark.ptc.spbu.ru/~uwe/          |       Ist zu Grunde gehen