linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] LZO de/compression support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <E3A63767-F44E-404B-BA43-8DEB223CCAC7@cam.ac.uk>
Date:	Mon, 28 May 2007 13:16:08 +0100
From:	Michael-Luke Jones <mlj28@....ac.uk>
To:	"Nitin Gupta" <nitingupta910@...il.com>
Cc:	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mm-cc@...top.org,
	linuxcompressed-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Richard Purdie" <richard@...nedhand.com>,
	"Daniel Hazelton" <dhazelton@...er.net>,
	"Bret Towe" <magnade@...il.com>,
	"Satyam Sharma" <satyam.sharma@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] LZO de/compression support - take 5

On 28 May 2007, at 13:09, Nitin Gupta wrote:

>> This means:
>> 1) Options in lib/Kconfig hidden (selectable by drivers as required)
>
> LZO as hidden option has no practical sense. Although LZO should be
> auto-selected when some dependent project is selected (e.g. reieser4)
> - there should be separate patch for this. Mixing such changes with
> 'core' LZO patch will just add side noise.

No, LZO as a visible option makes no practical sense. Why would  
anyone want to build LZO into a kernel when there are no in-kernel  
users of the code?

In fact, all of the library code should probably go this way...

Michael-Luke Jones

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/