On 5/28/07, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
