Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262760AbVDAPFu (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Apr 2005 10:05:50 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262758AbVDAPFu (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Apr 2005 10:05:50 -0500 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:46483 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262757AbVDAPFp (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Apr 2005 10:05:45 -0500 Subject: Re: [RFC] CryptoAPI & Compression From: David Woodhouse To: "Artem B. Bityuckiy" Cc: "Artem B. Bityuckiy" , Herbert Xu , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <424D6175.8000700@yandex.ru> References: <1112366647.3899.66.camel@localhost.localdomain> <424D6175.8000700@yandex.ru> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 16:05:25 +0100 Message-Id: <1112367926.3899.70.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.1.1 (2.2.1.1-2) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 728 Lines: 18 On Fri, 2005-04-01 at 18:57 +0400, Artem B. Bityuckiy wrote: > Yes, the compression will be better. But the implementation will be more > complicated. > We can try to use the "bound" functions to predict how many bytes to > pass to the deflate's input, but there is no guarantee they'll fit into > the output buffer. In this case we'll need to try again. Can we not predict the maximum number of bytes it'll take to flush the stream when we're not using Z_SYNC_FLUSH? -- dwmw2 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/