[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMOw1v7ihLgrrtgak2s9hDDsUrSnD7wO8FJTrZvsrJzarH6ZRg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 18:41:44 -0300
From: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@...fusion.mobi>
To: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: linux-modules <linux-modules@...r.kernel.org>,
Lucas De Marchi <lucas.de.marchi@...il.com>,
Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>,
Dave Reisner <d@...conindy.com>
Subject: Drop support to compressed modules?
Hey,
I'd like to ask people the following question: why are you using
compressed modules? Is it only for the disk space or is there any
performance related reason?
While fixing a bug in kmod related to using compressed modules (that
already existed in module-init-tools) we stopped to think about these
questions. Dave made a couple of benchmarks and performance wise it's
better to use uncompressed modules than modules with gz or xz
compression. However the benchmark was done in only 1 computer. I do
expect people with slow storage to have different numbers though. Does
anyone have these numbers?
About the bug, I think it's fixed in
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-modules/msg00846.html. Need to test
a bit more before rolling out a new release.
Regards,
Lucas De Marchi
--
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