From: "Jörn Engel" <joern@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Cc: matsunaga <matsunaga_kazuhisa@yahoo.co.jp>
Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] 1/2 central workspace for zlib
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 18:37:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030602163704.GC679@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1054569564.20369.385.camel@passion.cambridge.redhat.com>
On Mon, 2 June 2003 16:59:25 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-06-02 at 16:53, Jörn Engel wrote:
> > Maybe lazy allocation. vmalloc() it with the first write(), which
> > should be never in production use. So the extra overhead doesn't
> > really matter.
>
> Seems reasonable.
Patch is in CVS.
Not 100% sure about the correct return code, if the lazy allocation
fails. Can you check that?
Matsunaga, I guess that the extra memory you now have on your machine
has more impact on performance than statical allocation would have.
Translate the saved memory into a monetary unit and you even have a
lart that works for managers.
Jörn
--
You can't tell where a program is going to spend its time. Bottlenecks
occur in surprising places, so don't try to second guess and put in a
speed hack until you've proven that's where the bottleneck is.
-- Rob Pike
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Jörn Engel" <joern@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org,
matsunaga <matsunaga_kazuhisa@yahoo.co.jp>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] 1/2 central workspace for zlib
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 18:37:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030602163704.GC679@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1054569564.20369.385.camel@passion.cambridge.redhat.com>
On Mon, 2 June 2003 16:59:25 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-06-02 at 16:53, Jörn Engel wrote:
> > Maybe lazy allocation. vmalloc() it with the first write(), which
> > should be never in production use. So the extra overhead doesn't
> > really matter.
>
> Seems reasonable.
Patch is in CVS.
Not 100% sure about the correct return code, if the lazy allocation
fails. Can you check that?
Matsunaga, I guess that the extra memory you now have on your machine
has more impact on performance than statical allocation would have.
Translate the saved memory into a monetary unit and you even have a
lart that works for managers.
Jörn
--
You can't tell where a program is going to spend its time. Bottlenecks
occur in surprising places, so don't try to second guess and put in a
speed hack until you've proven that's where the bottleneck is.
-- Rob Pike
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-06-02 16:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-05-30 14:49 [PATCH RFC] 1/2 central workspace for zlib Jörn Engel
2003-05-30 14:49 ` Jörn Engel
2003-05-30 15:29 ` James Morris
2003-05-30 15:29 ` James Morris
2003-05-30 17:43 ` Jörn Engel
2003-05-30 17:43 ` Jörn Engel
2003-05-31 0:14 ` David S. Miller
2003-05-31 0:14 ` David S. Miller
2003-05-31 6:48 ` Jörn Engel
2003-05-31 6:48 ` Jörn Engel
2003-05-31 6:55 ` David S. Miller
2003-05-31 6:55 ` David S. Miller
2003-05-31 7:56 ` Jörn Engel
2003-05-31 7:56 ` Jörn Engel
2003-05-31 7:59 ` David S. Miller
2003-05-31 7:59 ` David S. Miller
2003-05-31 8:11 ` Jörn Engel
2003-05-31 8:11 ` Jörn Engel
2003-05-31 8:12 ` David S. Miller
2003-05-31 8:12 ` David S. Miller
2003-05-31 8:22 ` Con Kolivas
2003-05-31 8:22 ` Con Kolivas
2003-06-01 1:25 ` Matt Mackall
2003-06-01 1:25 ` Matt Mackall
2003-06-02 12:19 ` Jörn Engel
2003-06-02 12:19 ` Jörn Engel
2003-05-31 9:09 ` Arjan van de Ven
2003-05-31 9:09 ` Arjan van de Ven
2003-05-31 6:20 ` David S. Miller
2003-05-31 6:20 ` David S. Miller
2003-05-31 10:51 ` James Morris
2003-05-31 10:51 ` James Morris
2003-05-31 11:07 ` Jörn Engel
2003-05-31 11:07 ` Jörn Engel
2003-05-31 15:44 ` Joakim Tjernlund
2003-06-02 12:26 ` Jörn Engel
2003-06-02 13:03 ` Joakim Tjernlund
2003-06-02 13:32 ` Jörn Engel
2003-06-02 15:15 ` matsunaga
2003-06-02 15:15 ` matsunaga
2003-06-02 15:36 ` Jörn Engel
2003-06-02 15:36 ` Jörn Engel
2003-06-02 15:40 ` David Woodhouse
2003-06-02 15:40 ` David Woodhouse
2003-06-02 15:53 ` Jörn Engel
2003-06-02 15:53 ` Jörn Engel
2003-06-02 15:59 ` David Woodhouse
2003-06-02 15:59 ` David Woodhouse
2003-06-02 16:37 ` Jörn Engel [this message]
2003-06-02 16:37 ` Jörn Engel
2003-06-02 19:36 ` David Woodhouse
2003-06-02 19:36 ` David Woodhouse
2003-06-02 20:54 ` Jörn Engel
2003-06-02 20:54 ` Jörn Engel
2003-06-02 16:07 ` matsunaga
2003-06-02 16:07 ` matsunaga
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=20030602163704.GC679@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de \
--to=joern@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=matsunaga_kazuhisa@yahoo.co.jp \
/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.