The Increasing Size Of The Linux Kernel

[DeiF]

This is a non-issue.
Just a statistical curiosity.

Of course adding more features and drivers will make the kernel grow. What's the point?

[XorEaxEax]

This is a non-issue.
Just a statistical curiosity.

Of course adding more features and drivers will make the kernel grow. What's the point?

Indeed, could it be more obvious? Meanwhile if someone wants to trim the kernel (as in physical space on the harddrive) you can compile it with localmodconfig which will only compile in the modules currently used thus greatly lowering physical size aswell as compile time. This won't affect the memory usage though as only driver modules of hardware which Linux has found will be loaded into memory. This is why while the Linux kernel image gets bigger due to more drivers being added, the actual ram usage doesn't increase (it only loads what it needs).

[kebabbert]

This is a non-issue.
Just a statistical curiosity.

Of course adding more features and drivers will make the kernel grow. What's the point?

The point is that Linux is getting more and more bloated, which is a bad thing. Linux users have for long accused Windows of being bloated. But when Linux is bloated, it is a non issue? The thing is, the more code, the more bugs. It is a fact. And THAT my friends, is a real issue worth taking seriously. Even Linus Torvalds says said this was a problem long time ago, and when I quoted Linus, I got attacked from lot of Linux fanboys.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/09/22/linus_torvalds_linux_bloated_huge/

Citing an internal Intel study that tracked kernel releases, Bottomley said Linux performance had dropped about two per centage points at every release, for a cumulative drop of about 12 per cent over the last ten releases. "Is this a problem?" he asked.

"We're getting bloated and huge. Yes, it's a problem," said Torvalds.

So, is Linux getting bloated and huge or not? Is it a problem or not? Did the Linux fanboys that attacked me and accused me of FUDing (when I quoted Linus), speak of ignorance? Am I alone thinking this is a problem or do the Linux kernel devs think it is a problem as well?



So, what can we do about this? Well, first of all I think Linus should try to design Linux and have a plan. If the other Unixes can have a plan, then probably Linus can it too. Instead Linux rewrites everything all the time, so the code is always new. And only mature code has less bugs. Wait until Windows SP1 before using it - because then the code is more mature people say. The same with Linux. Instead of rewriting everything from scratch, better to have a design and stick to it. And revise it now and then. Not rewrite everything all the time - which means the code is always new and buggy.

[kraftman]

Everyone knows that kernel is getting larger and larger. It's obvious while there are new drivers, tools and file systems being added.

https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/11/12/33

[kraftman]

The point is that Linux is getting more and more bloated, which is a bad thing. Linux users have for long accused Windows of being bloated. But when Linux is bloated, it is a non issue? The thing is, the more code, the more bugs. It is a fact. And THAT my friends, is a real issue worth taking seriously. Even Linus Torvalds says said this was a problem long time ago, and when I quoted Linus, I got attacked from lot of Linux fanboys.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/09..._bloated_huge/

Oh, Kebbabert idiot. Thankfully Linux isn't bloated the way slowlaris is. It's just Linux package that is getting larger, but you use just few percent of entire package on your computer. If there are bugs in PowerPC or somewhere else it doesn't affect me. Slowlaris is bloated very bad way - it's bloated by design thus its highly optimized binaries are at least 30% slower than average Linux ones.

[yoshi314]

This is a non-issue.
Just a statistical curiosity.

Of course adding more features and drivers will make the kernel grow. What's the point?

i just worry that kernel requires more and more disk space to build. there should be a convenient way to unpack it selectively, excluding subdirectories you do not need - afaik kernel buildsystem is robust enough to allow that.

hopefully it will not overtake average storage capacity grow rate

[kebabbert]

Oh, Kebbabert idiot. Thankfully Linux isn't bloated the way slowlaris is. It's just Linux package that is getting larger, but you use just few percent of entire package on your computer. If there are bugs in PowerPC or somewhere else it doesn't affect me. Slowlaris is bloated very bad way - it's bloated by design thus its highly optimized binaries are at least 30% slower than average Linux ones.

I have shown you benchmarks where Solaris faster than Linux, on slower hardware. I would not call Solaris being slow nor bloated. Solaris holds several world records today, faster than everyone else, faster than Linux. I can repost these benchmarks again if you want to see them?

"Thankfully Linux isn't bloated the way slowlaris is" - so you admit that Linux is bloated? However, Linux is not bloated the same way as Solaris, but Linux is bloated? You denied this earlier, when I quoted Linus T on this. So Linus T is wrong on this? He does not know, the Linux kernel is not getting huge and bloated? You know better?

[AnonymousCoward]

So, what can we do about this? Well, first of all I think Linus should

Emphasis mine.

[XorEaxEax]

The point is that Linux is getting more and more bloated, which is a bad thing.

There's certainly tons of things in the kernel I do not use, and thus for me they are arguably 'bloat', for others these things are perhaps essential. In other words, when you need it, it's a feature, when you don't need it, it's bloat. Linux is a jack-of-all-trades kernel and as such will support just about everything for which there is a demand and of course support in the form of code. If you do not like this, you can roll your own kernel and omit any features you do not want. Given that Linux is an extremely popular kernel for a wide range of uses it will continue to grow as more features are requested and added. This is not a problem, instead it's a reason as to why Linux is so successful.

Linus remark is related to what he once envisioned Linux to be as is obvious from from what he said in the same paragraph: -"I mean, sometimes it's a bit sad that we are definitely not the streamlined, small, hyper-efficient kernel that I envisioned 15 years ago"

The cited Intel study was an internal study and I've seen no official benchmark numbers to back it up anywhere, we don't even know what particular part of the Linux kernel was measured.

Of course you know all this, but as a Solaris-fanboy you keep repeating this out-of-context statement by Linus.

[kraftman]

I have shown you benchmarks where Solaris faster than Linux, on slower hardware. I would not call Solaris being slow nor bloated. Solaris holds several world records today, faster than everyone else, faster than Linux. I can repost these benchmarks again if you want to see them?

Haha, do you mean those irrelevant SAP benchmarks? You can post them again, so we can make even more fun of you:

http://centiq.co.uk/the-saps-benchmark.html

There are many world records Linux holds.

"Thankfully Linux isn't bloated the way slowlaris is" - so you admit that Linux is bloated? However, Linux is not bloated the same way as Solaris, but Linux is bloated? You denied this earlier, when I quoted Linus T on this. So Linus T is wrong on this? He does not know, the Linux kernel is not getting huge and bloated? You know better?

The answer is very simple. When comes to entire Linux kernel package it's bloated, but this doesn't affect Linux users at all (unless they have slow internet connection and they want to download a kernel). When comes to Linux kernel you run it's not bloated (unless you compile it with everything enabled). Thing is different with slowlaris, because it's kernel is bloated such way it affects you badly - say 30% slower binaries mentioned before.