From: "kyungsik.lee" <kyungsik.lee@lge.com>
To: Egon Alter <egon.alter@gmx.net>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz>,
hyojun.im@lge.com, raphael.andy.lee@gmail.com,
linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, gunho.lee@lge.com,
namhyung.kim@lge.com, x86@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
Nitin Gupta <nitingupta910@gmail.com>,
Richard Purdie <rpurdie@openedhand.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Joe Millenbach <jmillenbach@gmail.com>,
chan.jeong@lge.com, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Albin Tonnerre <albin.tonnerre@free-electrons.com>,
CE Linux Developers List <celinux-dev@lists.celinuxforum.org>,
minchan.kim@lge.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Add support for LZ4-compressed kernels
Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2013 17:15:00 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <510B7984.3060509@lge.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <34874167.ghObrToI03@fb07-iapwap2>
On 2013-01-29 오후 8:43, Egon Alter wrote:
> 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".
Yes, the larger image could matter. Definitely it takes longer.
Here are some updated test cases: Including "loading time"
lzo lz4
loading time: 480ms 510ms
decompression time: 336ms 180ms(with efficient unaligned memory
access enabled and ARM optimization)
total time: 816ms 690ms
lz4 is still 15% faster in total time. This one is similar to the
simulated result by Russell King.
Thanks,
Kyungsik
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: kyungsik.lee@lge.com (kyungsik.lee)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Add support for LZ4-compressed kernels
Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2013 17:15:00 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <510B7984.3060509@lge.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <34874167.ghObrToI03@fb07-iapwap2>
On 2013-01-29 ?? 8:43, Egon Alter wrote:
> 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".
Yes, the larger image could matter. Definitely it takes longer.
Here are some updated test cases: Including "loading time"
lzo lz4
loading time: 480ms 510ms
decompression time: 336ms 180ms(with efficient unaligned memory
access enabled and ARM optimization)
total time: 816ms 690ms
lz4 is still 15% faster in total time. This one is similar to the
simulated result by Russell King.
Thanks,
Kyungsik
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-02-01 8:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-26 5:50 [RFC PATCH 0/4] Add support for LZ4-compressed kernels Kyungsik Lee
2013-01-26 5:50 ` Kyungsik Lee
2013-01-26 5:50 ` [RFC PATCH 1/4] decompressors: add lz4 decompressor module Kyungsik Lee
2013-01-26 5:50 ` Kyungsik Lee
2013-01-26 5:50 ` [RFC PATCH 2/4] lib: add support for LZ4-compressed kernels Kyungsik Lee
2013-01-26 5:50 ` Kyungsik Lee
2013-01-26 5:50 ` [RFC PATCH 3/4] arm: " Kyungsik Lee
2013-01-26 5:50 ` Kyungsik Lee
2013-01-26 5:50 ` [RFC PATCH 4/4] x86: " Kyungsik Lee
2013-01-26 5:50 ` Kyungsik Lee
2013-01-28 22:25 ` [RFC PATCH 0/4] Add " Andrew Morton
2013-01-28 22:25 ` Andrew Morton
2013-01-29 1:16 ` kyungsik.lee
2013-01-29 1:16 ` kyungsik.lee
2013-01-29 4:29 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-01-29 4:29 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-01-29 6:18 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-29 6:18 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-30 10:23 ` Johannes Stezenbach
2013-01-30 10:23 ` Johannes Stezenbach
2013-02-04 2:02 ` Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer
2013-02-04 2:02 ` Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer
2013-02-04 10:50 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-04 10:50 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-05 11:39 ` Johannes Stezenbach
2013-02-05 11:39 ` Johannes Stezenbach
2013-01-29 7:26 ` Richard Cochran
2013-01-29 7:26 ` Richard Cochran
2013-01-29 10:15 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-01-29 10:15 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-01-29 11:43 ` Egon Alter
2013-01-29 11:43 ` Egon Alter
2013-01-29 12:15 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-01-29 12:15 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-01 8:15 ` kyungsik.lee [this message]
2013-02-01 8:15 ` kyungsik.lee
2013-01-30 3:36 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-30 3:36 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-30 18:33 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-01-30 18:33 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-01-31 21:48 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-31 21:48 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-31 22:16 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-01-31 22:16 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-01-31 22:18 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-31 22:18 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-02-01 2:28 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-01 2:28 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-01 6:37 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-02-01 6:37 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-29 21:09 ` Rajesh Pawar
2013-01-29 21:09 ` Rajesh Pawar
2013-02-01 7:00 ` kyungsik.lee
2013-02-01 7:00 ` kyungsik.lee
2013-02-04 1:37 ` Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer
2013-02-04 1:37 ` Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer
2013-01-29 22:55 ` David Sterba
2013-01-29 22:55 ` David Sterba
2013-01-30 4:03 ` 이경식
2013-01-30 4:27 ` 이경식
2013-02-01 7:13 ` kyungsik.lee
2013-02-01 7:13 ` kyungsik.lee
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=510B7984.3060509@lge.com \
--to=kyungsik.lee@lge.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=albin.tonnerre@free-electrons.com \
--cc=celinux-dev@lists.celinuxforum.org \
--cc=chan.jeong@lge.com \
--cc=egon.alter@gmx.net \
--cc=gunho.lee@lge.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=hyojun.im@lge.com \
--cc=jmillenbach@gmail.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=minchan.kim@lge.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mmarek@suse.cz \
--cc=namhyung.kim@lge.com \
--cc=nitingupta910@gmail.com \
--cc=raphael.andy.lee@gmail.com \
--cc=rpurdie@openedhand.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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.