Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759798AbXE1Ipp (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 May 2007 04:45:45 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1761117AbXE1IoH (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 May 2007 04:44:07 -0400 Received: from keil-draco.com ([216.193.185.50]:50576 "EHLO mail" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1761993AbXE1IoF (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 May 2007 04:44:05 -0400 From: Daniel Hazelton To: "Nitin Gupta" Subject: Re: [RFC] LZO de/compression support - take 4 Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 04:43:55 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 Cc: "Satyam Sharma" , "Richard Purdie" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm-cc@laptop.org, "Andrew Morton" , "Andrey Panin" , "Bret Towe" , "Michael-Luke Jones" References: <4cefeab80705250445m51736a9aj8c89af893d8c242c@mail.gmail.com> <200705280418.07538.dhazelton@enter.net> <4cefeab80705280137v178a449fl391b99b6804a75f2@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4cefeab80705280137v178a449fl391b99b6804a75f2@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200705280443.56152.dhazelton@enter.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2143 Lines: 59 On Monday 28 May 2007 04:37:04 Nitin Gupta wrote: > On 5/28/07, Daniel Hazelton wrote: > > Test code for this version (take 4) of the minimized LZO1X (from the > > liblzo v2) is complete. > > > > > > I don't see a significant slow-down comparing the complete liblzo2 to > > this minimized code on my system (Pentium M 1.73GHz, 1GB Ram, Kubuntu > > Feisty (stock Kubuntu kernel)). Rather, I see the opposite. This *might* > > have been caused by the dynamic linking (or similar) so rather than rely > > on simply doing "time xxx" I actually put checks around the calls to the > > compress/decompress functions themselves. > > > > ('Tiny LZO' is what I call Nitins extremely small implementation of > > lzo1x_[de]compress) > > > > Output of the provided "test" script: > > 10 run averages: > > 'Tiny LZO': > > Combined: 113.2 usec > > Compression: 77.4 usec > > Decompression: 35.8 usec > > 'liblzo2': > > Combined: 140.7 usec > > Compression: 94 usec > > Decompression: 46.7 usec > > > > (The "Combined" average is the average time taken for a > > compress+decompress) > > > > TODO: > > -Implement userspace version of likely/unlikely > > -Implement cpu_to_le16 so code functions on BE systems > > > > DRH > > As you mentioned in your mail, you are using lzo1x_1_11_compress() > which is slower than what I ported (which is same as what is exported > by miniLZO). So, can you please test with the version ported - this > is found in lzo/src/lzo1x_1.c (or in minilzo.c). > Also, can you please use 'take 5' for your next testing? > > Thanks, > Nitin Will do. (that's DBITS=15, correct?) However, when I averaged it 100 times, lzo1x_1_11_compress() showed better speed than your implementation - about 1.5% faster. The *unsafe* decompressor, however, only shows about a 1.2% speed advantage over the safe decompressor. DRH - 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/