Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 8 Mar 2016 11:42:31 -0700
From:      Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>
To:        Brad Walker <bwalker@musings.com>
Cc:        "freebsd-embedded@freebsd.org" <freebsd-embedded@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: ? about kernel size..
Message-ID:  <CANCZdfriqr24Lh9ZuptaC0gEm6gAV6LN9XHcVAJtbyaBejEgNg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPKZHbVyPji-bZwDzM77TN6qybjRcf%2BZe5r6WZmbG98LkhT-rg@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <CAPKZHbVyPji-bZwDzM77TN6qybjRcf%2BZe5r6WZmbG98LkhT-rg@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 10:42 AM, Brad Walker <bwalker@musings.com> wrote:

> I'm looking at working on a new project that will use the FreeBSD kernel. I
> would attempt to embed the kernel on a very small NXP Kinetis chip. I've
> previously done this using a Linux kernel but also had DDR memory attached
> to the chip. This project would not have a DDR chip attached.
>
> So a couple of questions. 1 - What is the smallest size I could configure
> the FreeBSD kernel out of the box? Could I get the size to be less than
> 10MB, 5MB, 2MB, or etc.?
>

I've managed to get this down to about 2MB or a bit smaller. Compressed
this can be a little smaller. It takes a fair amount of work, but it can be
done.


> I did a little bit of research on the PicoBSD and NanoBSD but that still
> seem to be targeted to a little bit bigger chip than I have available.
>

How big a chip do you have? NanoBSD currently needs at least
64MB (and ideally 128MB) of storage. PicoBSD can be a bit smaller.

Warner


> Thanks for any insight/help. Also, if you response, please include me on
> the CC line as I'm not a member of the freebsd-embedded alias.
>



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CANCZdfriqr24Lh9ZuptaC0gEm6gAV6LN9XHcVAJtbyaBejEgNg>