[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1374876053.3031.19@driftwood>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 17:00:53 -0500
From: Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>
To: Gu Zheng <guz.fnst@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: Phillip Lougher <phillip.lougher@...il.com>,
Phillip Lougher <phillip@...ashfs.org.uk>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-embedded@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Squashfs: add LZ4 compression
On 07/22/2013 01:04:59 AM, Gu Zheng wrote:
> On 07/22/2013 01:07 PM, Phillip Lougher wrote:
>
> > On 22 July 2013 04:05, Gu Zheng <guz.fnst@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> >> Hi Phillip,
> >> Have some tests been carried out to confirm that Squashfs
> really
> >> can get benefit from LZ4 compression, comparing with lzo?
> >
> > This seems to be a loaded question, in that it seems to be trying to
> > reopen the "why add lz4 when we already have lzo" debate all over
> > again. As LZ4 has been merged to mainline, this appears to be a
> > question that has already been answered.
>
> No, they are different. LZ4 can be merged to mainline, because we can
> see the benefit(faster compressing speed under the enabled unaligned
> memory access) it brings to us comparing with lzo.
> But it's hard to say that it also really can bring benefit to
> Squashfs.
A compression format was added to the kernel. Philip hooked up the code
that was already in the kernel to a filesystem that was already in the
kernel.
You consider this action controversial...
Rob--
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