On 07/22/2013 01:04:59 AM, Gu Zheng wrote:
On 07/22/2013 01:07 PM, Phillip Lougher wrote:
> On 22 July 2013 04:05, Gu Zheng <guz.fnst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Hi Phillip,
>> Have some tests been carried out to confirm that Squashfs
really
>> can get benefit from LZ4 compression, comparing with lzo?
>
> This seems to be a loaded question, in that it seems to be trying to
> reopen the "why add lz4 when we already have lzo" debate all over
> again. As LZ4 has been merged to mainline, this appears to be a
> question that has already been answered.
No, they are different. LZ4 can be merged to mainline, because we can
see the benefit(faster compressing speed under the enabled unaligned
memory access) it brings to us comparing with lzo.
But it's hard to say that it also really can bring benefit to
Squashfs.
A compression format was added to the kernel. Philip hooked up the code
that was already in the kernel to a filesystem that was already in the
kernel.
You consider this action controversial...
Rob--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-embedded" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
