[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <49EF33BC.6060905@zytor.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 08:11:56 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Goswin von Brederlow <goswin-v-b@....de>
CC: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com>,
Matti Aarnio <matti.aarnio@...iler.org>,
Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net>,
Prakash Punnoor <prakash@...noor.de>,
Michael Tokarev <mjt@....msk.ru>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-raid@...r.kernel.org, neilb@...e.de
Subject: Re: Proposal: make RAID6 code optional
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> writes:
>
>> Bill Davidsen wrote:
>>> It would seem that that space could be allocated and populated when
>>> raid6 was first used, as part of the initialization. I haven't looked at
>>> that code since it was new, so I might be optimistic about doing it that
>>> way.
>> We could use vmalloc() and generate the tables at initialization time.
>> However, having a separate module which exports the raid6 declaration
>> and uses the raid5 module as a subroutine library seems easier.
>>
>> -hpa
>
> Combine the two.
>
> The raid6 module initializes the tables for raid6 and uses the raid5
> module as subroutine library.
>
It really doesn't make sense at all. It's easier at that point to
retain the static tables.
-hpa
--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists