Hi Richard, On 5/25/07, Richard Purdie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, 2007-05-25 at 17:15 +0530, Nitin Gupta wrote: > Richard, can you please provide perf. results for this patch also? > Also, can you please mail back latest version of your LZO patch? In > meantime, I will try to include benchmarking support to the > 'compress-test' module.This version is 15% slower at decompression and about equal on compression.
If you don't mind, can you please try patch attached now? I have now also rolled back that cpu_to_le16() change as Satyam suggested. I see no other reason for this perf. loss as I made no other change! Also, can you please verify if you are comparing your _safe_ version with this patch? This patch does not include unsafe version and the safe one is simply called lzo1x_decompress().
I am however still strongly of the opinion that we should just use the version in -mm (which is my latest version).
I love this cleaned-up patch just sooo much! :) Anyhow, if we can spend just small time scanning through these ~500 LOC to find reasons for any perf. loss, we will gain a lot! Thanks, Nitin
patch_lzo_2.6.22-rc2_richard_test.bz2
Description: BZip2 compressed data
