From: Nicolas Pitre <nico@fluxnic.net>
To: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
Peter Korsgaard <jacmet@sunsite.dk>,
"Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer" <markus@oberhumer.com>,
Kyungsik Lee <kyungsik.lee@lge.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org,
x86@kernel.org, celinux-dev@lists.celinuxforum.org,
Nitin Gupta <nitingupta910@gmail.com>,
Richard Purdie <rpurdie@openedhand.com>,
Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
Joe Millenbach <jmillenbach@gmail.com>,
David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>,
Albin Tonnerre <albin.tonnerre@free-electrons.com>,
Egon Alter <egon.alter@gmx.net>,
hyojun.im@lge.com, chan.jeong@lge.com,
raphael.andy.lee@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] Add support for LZ4-compressed kernel
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 12:52:19 -0500 (EST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.03.1302271246440.1254@syhkavp.arg> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1361986787.20540.8.camel@joe-AO722>
On Wed, 27 Feb 2013, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-02-27 at 12:16 -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > RMK says that "66% increase in decompression speed over LZO" is
> > significant. You apparently disagree with that.
>
> Yeah, I can see how that can be interpreted.
> I'm referring only to the new LZO.
>
> I guess Russell has not reviewed the new LZO.
>
> There is apparently no speed increase for LZ4 over
> the new LZO.
>
> I believe Markus has shown comparison testing in
> this very thread.
>
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2187441/
Right.
Can the new LZO code be merged by Linus now? It has been sitting in
linux-next for quite some time. Afterwards we could revisit lz4
worthiness without all the present confusion.
BTW, I still wonder what that patch requiring ARM people approval is.
Nicolas
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: nico@fluxnic.net (Nicolas Pitre)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] Add support for LZ4-compressed kernel
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 12:52:19 -0500 (EST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.03.1302271246440.1254@syhkavp.arg> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1361986787.20540.8.camel@joe-AO722>
On Wed, 27 Feb 2013, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-02-27 at 12:16 -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > RMK says that "66% increase in decompression speed over LZO" is
> > significant. You apparently disagree with that.
>
> Yeah, I can see how that can be interpreted.
> I'm referring only to the new LZO.
>
> I guess Russell has not reviewed the new LZO.
>
> There is apparently no speed increase for LZ4 over
> the new LZO.
>
> I believe Markus has shown comparison testing in
> this very thread.
>
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2187441/
Right.
Can the new LZO code be merged by Linus now? It has been sitting in
linux-next for quite some time. Afterwards we could revisit lz4
worthiness without all the present confusion.
BTW, I still wonder what that patch requiring ARM people approval is.
Nicolas
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-02-27 17:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 67+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-02-26 6:24 [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] Add support for LZ4-compressed kernel Kyungsik Lee
2013-02-26 6:24 ` Kyungsik Lee
2013-02-26 6:24 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/4] decompressor: Add LZ4 decompressor module Kyungsik Lee
2013-02-26 6:24 ` Kyungsik Lee
2013-02-26 13:12 ` David Sterba
2013-02-26 13:12 ` David Sterba
2013-02-27 4:38 ` Kyungsik Lee
2013-02-27 4:38 ` Kyungsik Lee
2013-02-26 6:24 ` [RFC PATCH v2 2/4] lib: Add support for LZ4-compressed kernel Kyungsik Lee
2013-02-26 6:24 ` Kyungsik Lee
2013-02-26 14:00 ` David Sterba
2013-02-26 14:00 ` David Sterba
2013-02-28 5:22 ` Kyungsik Lee
2013-02-28 5:22 ` Kyungsik Lee
2013-02-26 6:24 ` [RFC PATCH v2 3/4] arm: " Kyungsik Lee
2013-02-26 6:24 ` Kyungsik Lee
2013-02-26 6:24 ` [RFC PATCH v2 4/4] x86: " Kyungsik Lee
2013-02-26 6:24 ` Kyungsik Lee
2013-02-26 20:33 ` [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] " Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer
2013-02-26 20:33 ` Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer
2013-02-26 20:59 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-26 20:59 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-26 21:58 ` Peter Korsgaard
2013-02-26 21:58 ` Peter Korsgaard
2013-02-26 22:09 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-26 22:09 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-26 22:10 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-26 22:10 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-27 1:40 ` Joe Perches
2013-02-27 1:40 ` Joe Perches
2013-02-27 9:56 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-27 9:56 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-27 15:49 ` Joe Perches
2013-02-27 15:49 ` Joe Perches
2013-02-27 16:08 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-27 16:08 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-27 16:08 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-27 16:31 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-27 16:31 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-27 16:53 ` Borislav Petkov
2013-02-27 16:53 ` Borislav Petkov
2013-02-27 17:04 ` Joe Perches
2013-02-27 17:04 ` Joe Perches
2013-02-27 17:16 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-27 17:16 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-27 17:39 ` Joe Perches
2013-02-27 17:39 ` Joe Perches
2013-02-27 17:52 ` Nicolas Pitre [this message]
2013-02-27 17:52 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-27 17:57 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-27 17:57 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-27 17:36 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-27 17:36 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-28 4:22 ` Joe Perches
2013-02-28 4:22 ` Joe Perches
2013-02-27 7:36 ` Kyungsik Lee
2013-02-27 7:36 ` Kyungsik Lee
2013-02-27 9:51 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-27 9:51 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-27 10:20 ` Johannes Stezenbach
2013-02-27 10:20 ` Johannes Stezenbach
2013-02-27 15:35 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-27 15:35 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-27 13:23 ` Kyungsik Lee
2013-02-27 13:23 ` Kyungsik Lee
2013-02-27 22:21 ` Andrew Morton
2013-02-27 22:21 ` Andrew Morton
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=alpine.LFD.2.03.1302271246440.1254@syhkavp.arg \
--to=nico@fluxnic.net \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=albin.tonnerre@free-electrons.com \
--cc=celinux-dev@lists.celinuxforum.org \
--cc=chan.jeong@lge.com \
--cc=dsterba@suse.cz \
--cc=egon.alter@gmx.net \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=hyojun.im@lge.com \
--cc=jacmet@sunsite.dk \
--cc=jmillenbach@gmail.com \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=kyungsik.lee@lge.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=markus@oberhumer.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mmarek@suse.cz \
--cc=nitingupta910@gmail.com \
--cc=raphael.andy.lee@gmail.com \
--cc=richardcochran@gmail.com \
--cc=rpurdie@openedhand.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.