Am Dienstag, 29. Januar 2013, 10:15:49 schrieb Russell King - ARM Linux: > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 02:25:10PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > What's this "with enabled unaligned memory access" thing? You mean "if > > the arch supports CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS"? If so, > > that's only x86, which isn't really in the target market for this > > patch, yes? > > > > It's a lot of code for a 50ms boot-time improvement. Does anyone have > > any opinions on whether or not the benefits are worth the cost? > > Well... when I saw this my immediate reaction was "oh no, yet another > decompressor for the kernel". We have five of these things already. > Do we really need a sixth? > > My feeling is that we should have: > - one decompressor which is the fastest > - one decompressor for the highest compression ratio > - one popular decompressor (eg conventional gzip) the problem gets more complicated as the "fastest" decompressor usually creates larger images which need more time to load from the storage, e.g. a one MB larger image on a 10 MB/s storage (note: bootloaders often configure the storage controllers in slow modes) gives 100 ms more boot time, thus eating the gain of a "fast decompressor". Egon -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
