Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 22 Apr 2009 20:57:03 +0200 | From | Andre Noll <> | Subject | Re: Proposal: make RAID6 code optional |
| |
On 11:39, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Yes, I believe it would be easier than having dynamically allocated > arrays. Dynamically generated arrays using static memory allocations > (bss) is one thing, but that would only reduce size of the module on > disk, which I don't think anyone considers a problem.
We would save 64K of RAM in the raid5-only case if we'd defer the allocation of the multiplication table until the first raid6 array is about to be started.
Andre -- The only person who always got his work done by Friday was Robinson Crusoe [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |