[lkml]   [1999]   [Sep]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [patch] longstanding chksum patch
On Fri, 10 Sep 1999, Artur Skawina wrote:

>Bottom line: there's no point in fixing an imaginary bug while
>penalizing certain other legal cases. You always have to compromize,
>choose between cache footprint vs raw speed, speed vs cpu resources
>used (not only cached, but also btbs etc) etc etc.
>If you can show a case where the so called bug is triggered _from_
>_user_ _space_ (or by net traffic)... [1]
>[1] and, even then, it's better to fix the cause, not the symptoms.

I _HATE_ dirty hacks which gives some more speed and that loses a clean
interface. All string functions works careless about the alignment of the
buffers, and the same should be done by the chksum routine. I don't want
special cases just to get some more speed. I perfectly know that currently
all callers are using 32bit aligned buffers, that's not my point at all.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:53    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans