• henfredemars@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    66
    ·
    12 days ago

    I’ve seen builds of the Linux kernel that comfortably fits in my on-die CPU caches.

    So it would just be a picture of an empty sofa.

    • cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      42
      ·
      12 days ago

      There are mid range CPUs with 128MB of L3 cache now. A Linux distro like Tiny Core could fit entirely in cache.

      • henfredemars@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        12 days ago

        Hm? Do you mean a link to builds that are this small? My Intel i5-12600K (I’m a working man, doc…) L3 cache is 20,971,520 bytes. My Linux Mint (basically Ubuntu kernel) vmlinuz right now is only 14,952,840 bytes. Sure, that’s a compressed kernel image not uncompressed, but consider this is a generic kernel built to run most desktops applications very comfortably and with wide hardware support. It’s not too hard to imagine fitting an uncompressed kernel into the same amount of space. Does that help to show they’re roughly on the same order of magnitude?

        Ten years old kernels could be 2 MB.

    • BCsven@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      12 days ago

      My ARM board from 2010 has 256MB of memory. It runs an old 3.1 kernel (not attached to internet) , new kernels won’t fit/load. But on that I have OpenMediaVault running SAMBA shares and mindlna to serve music. It isn’t even using 50% of the 256MB