Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S935972AbZDAX3Y (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Apr 2009 19:29:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S934935AbZDAXMG (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Apr 2009 19:12:06 -0400 Received: from mga07.intel.com ([143.182.124.22]:24200 "EHLO azsmga101.ch.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934933AbZDAXMF (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Apr 2009 19:12:05 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.39,309,1235980800"; d="scan'208";a="126798884" Message-ID: <49D3F4A3.1040609@linux.intel.com> Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 16:11:31 -0700 From: Arjan van de Ven User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "H. Peter Anvin" CC: Andreas Robinson , Alain Knaff , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] lib: add fast lzo decompressor References: <1238593252-3435-1-git-send-email-andr345@gmail.com> <1238593252-3435-2-git-send-email-andr345@gmail.com> <49D3927A.2050406@zytor.com> <1238613730.10514.35.camel@andreas-desktop> <49D3D4C0.1080506@zytor.com> <1238624827.15230.58.camel@andreas-desktop> <49D3EDEA.4090803@zytor.com> In-Reply-To: <49D3EDEA.4090803@zytor.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1393 Lines: 32 H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Andreas Robinson wrote: >> Anyway, I assume it is maintainability rather than size you're concerned >> about here? > > Right, of course. > >> OTOH, the safe version is far from useless. >> I estimate (but haven't tested yet) that you would lose about 40 ms in >> the Eee test case. That is, the boot-time savings are reduced from 123 >> to perhaps 85 ms which is still acceptable. It is certainly much less >> complicated than the alternatives, so if that's what you would prefer I >> can go that way. > > I think if the cost is 40 ms once during boot on a slow platform, it's > worth unifying the two codebases. I am *not* saying that I don't think > boot performance matters -- far be from it -- but I think this is > probably worth the reliability and maintainability advantages of having > a single piece of code if at all possible. > > Of course, if you can figure out how to avoid that and still have the > code clean, then that's another matter. > > [Cc: Arjan, fast boot evangelizer. ;)] as long as LZO is optional.... and it's documented somewhere to not use it if you want fast speed I'm totally fine. -- 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/