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: <4cefeab80705292231g4c166cd8xd920f2721cbb9c0e@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 30 May 2007 11:01:59 +0530
From:	"Nitin Gupta" <nitingupta910@...il.com>
To:	"Adrian Bunk" <bunk@...sta.de>
Cc:	"Jan Engelhardt" <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>,
	"Daniel Hazelton" <dhazelton@...er.net>,
	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>,
	"Bret Towe" <magnade@...il.com>,
	"Satyam Sharma" <satyam.sharma@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] LZO de/compression support - take 6

On 5/30/07, Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de> wrote:
> On Tue, May 29, 2007 at 11:10:05PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> >
> > On May 28 2007 19:11, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> You completely miss the point of my question.
>
> It's about the performance improvements of the modified code that were
> mentioned.
>
> What you are talking about shouldn't have any effect on the generated
> code.
>

After Daniel refined this testing program, we can see that perf gain
is < 2% which can surely be accounted to cleanups like unnecessary
castings in tight loops.

Again, all the original code has been retained _as-is_. Whatever was
changed, has been mentioned in that detailed changelog that I post
along with patch.

If someone want to review these 500 lines with this changelog in hand,
it should not take more than couple of hours. If no-one can see any
problem in code by now and considering that it's tested on x86(_32),
amd64, ppc and giving somewhat better perf. than original then I
believe it is unnecessarily hanging outside of -mm tree.

I also contacted author (Markus Oberhumer) regarding above changes but
he seems not be responding right now. But still, if it gets into -mm
and gets used by various related projects then it should be good
enough for mainline also.

Cheers,
Nitin
-
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/