[lkml]   [2013]   [Jan]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Add support for LZ4-compressed kernels
On 01/29/2013 02:15 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 02:25:10PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> What's this "with enabled unaligned memory access" thing? You mean "if
>> that's only x86, which isn't really in the target market for this
>> patch, yes?
>> It's a lot of code for a 50ms boot-time improvement. Does anyone have
>> any opinions on whether or not the benefits are worth the cost?
> Well... when I saw this my immediate reaction was "oh no, yet another
> decompressor for the kernel". We have five of these things already.
> Do we really need a sixth?
> My feeling is that we should have:
> - one decompressor which is the fastest
> - one decompressor for the highest compression ratio
> - one popular decompressor (eg conventional gzip)
> And if we have a replacement one for one of these, then it should do
> exactly that: replace it. I realise that various architectures will
> behave differently, so we should really be looking at numbers across
> several arches.
> Otherwise, where do we stop adding new ones? After we have 6 of these
> (which is after this one). After 12? After the 20th?

The only concern I have with that is if someone paints themselves into a
corner and absolutely wants, say, LZO.

Otherwise, per your list it pretty much sounds like we should have lz4,
gzip, and xz.


H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.

 \ /
  Last update: 2013-01-30 05:01    [W:0.153 / U:1.748 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site