From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC6D3B7CBB for ; Wed, 24 Mar 2010 20:44:01 +1100 (EST) Subject: Re: Linux patches for XIP on MPC8xx? From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Wolfgang Denk In-Reply-To: <20100323194401.0B7724C022@gemini.denx.de> References: <4BA865D4.1090403@freemail.hu> <20100323194401.0B7724C022@gemini.denx.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 20:43:24 +1100 Message-ID: <1269423804.8599.217.camel@pasglop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: linuxppc-dev Development , Wolfgang Grandegger , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?N=E9meth_M=E1rton?= List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, 2010-03-23 at 20:44 +0100, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > There were very few tests done with later kernel versions, and in all > practical system configurations we tested we found that XIP did not > give real benefits. Usually execution from flash was slower than when > running from RAM, and even booting a (inevitably uncompressed) kernel > from flash is typically slower than loading a compressed image to RUM > and booting from there. ^ Missing an H here :-) Cheers, Ben.