[GIT PULL v2] Update LZO compression

[GIT PULL v2] Update LZO compression

[Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer]

Hi all,

as suggested on the mailing list I have converted the updated LZO
code into git, so please pull my "lzo-update" branch from

  git://github.com/markus-oberhumer/linux.git lzo-update

You can browse the branch at

  https://github.com/markus-oberhumer/linux/compare/lzo-update

I'd ask some official kernel maintainer for review and to push this into
linux-next so that it will hopefully land in the 3.7 release.

Share and enjoy,
Markus

Signed-off-by: Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer <markus@oberhumer.com>


[ Changes in v2: Optimize code for CPUs with inefficient unaligned
  access => significant speed increase on ARM ]


On 2012-07-16 20:30, Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I finally have prepared a small package that updates the LZO version
> in the Linux kernel. Please get it from:
>
> http://www.oberhumer.com/opensource/lzo/download/Testing/linux-kernel-lzo-20120716.tar.gz
>
> As stated in the README this version is significantly faster (typically more
> than 2 times faster!) than the current version, has been thoroughly tested on
> x86_64/i386/powerpc platforms and is intended to get included into the
> official Linux 3.6 or 3.7 release.
>
> I encourage all compression users to test and benchmark this new version,
> and I also would ask some official LZO maintainer to convert the updated
> source files into a GIT commit and possibly push it to Linus or linux-next.
>
> Share and enjoy,
> Markus
>
> Signed-off-by: Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer" <markus@oberhumer.com>

-- 
Markus Oberhumer, <markus@oberhumer.com>, http://www.oberhumer.com/

Re: [GIT PULL v2] Update LZO compression

[Johannes Stezenbach]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 832 bytes --]

On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 05:21:50PM +0200, Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer wrote:
> as suggested on the mailing list I have converted the updated LZO
> code into git, so please pull my "lzo-update" branch from
...
> [ Changes in v2: Optimize code for CPUs with inefficient unaligned
>   access => significant speed increase on ARM ]

I can confirm that this new code runs at the same speed
as the current lzo code in the Linux kernel on
my ARM926EJ-S based platform.  I only tested decompression,
using the attached hacky userspace code.

   # time ./lzo-bench/old/unlzop <lzoimage >/dev/null
   real    0m 0.29s
   # time ./lzo-bench/new/unlzop <lzoimage >/dev/null
   real    0m 0.29s

   (where lzoimage is a Linux Image compressed with lzop)

So, from my side there are no more objections.
Thanks for doing this work, Markus.


Johannes

[-- Attachment #2: lzo-bench.tar.gz --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 35783 bytes --]

Re: [GIT PULL v2] Update LZO compression

[Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer]

Hi all,

is there some official maintainer who feels responsible for
pushing the LZO update to Linus?

Otherwise I also could issue a pull-request on github, but somehow I
don't think that this is the preferred workflow.

Cheers,
Markus

On 2012-08-21 17:21, Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> as suggested on the mailing list I have converted the updated LZO
> code into git, so please pull my "lzo-update" branch from
> 
>   git://github.com/markus-oberhumer/linux.git lzo-update
> 
> You can browse the branch at
> 
>   https://github.com/markus-oberhumer/linux/compare/lzo-update
> 
> I'd ask some official kernel maintainer for review and to push this into
> linux-next so that it will hopefully land in the 3.7 release.
> 
> Share and enjoy,
> Markus
> 
> Signed-off-by: Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer <markus@oberhumer.com>
> 
> 
> [ Changes in v2: Optimize code for CPUs with inefficient unaligned
>   access => significant speed increase on ARM ]
> 
> 
> On 2012-07-16 20:30, Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I finally have prepared a small package that updates the LZO version
>> in the Linux kernel. Please get it from:
>>
>> http://www.oberhumer.com/opensource/lzo/download/Testing/linux-kernel-lzo-20120716.tar.gz
>>
>> As stated in the README this version is significantly faster (typically more
>> than 2 times faster!) than the current version, has been thoroughly tested on
>> x86_64/i386/powerpc platforms and is intended to get included into the
>> official Linux 3.6 or 3.7 release.
>>
>> I encourage all compression users to test and benchmark this new version,
>> and I also would ask some official LZO maintainer to convert the updated
>> source files into a GIT commit and possibly push it to Linus or linux-next.
>>
>> Share and enjoy,
>> Markus
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer" <markus@oberhumer.com>

-- 
Markus Oberhumer, <markus@oberhumer.com>, http://www.oberhumer.com/

Re: [GIT PULL v2] Update LZO compression

[richard -rw- weinberger]

CC'in akpm.

On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer
<markus@oberhumer.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> is there some official maintainer who feels responsible for
> pushing the LZO update to Linus?
>
> Otherwise I also could issue a pull-request on github, but somehow I
> don't think that this is the preferred workflow.
>
> Cheers,
> Markus
>
> On 2012-08-21 17:21, Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> as suggested on the mailing list I have converted the updated LZO
>> code into git, so please pull my "lzo-update" branch from
>>
>>   git://github.com/markus-oberhumer/linux.git lzo-update
>>
>> You can browse the branch at
>>
>>   https://github.com/markus-oberhumer/linux/compare/lzo-update
>>
>> I'd ask some official kernel maintainer for review and to push this into
>> linux-next so that it will hopefully land in the 3.7 release.
>>
>> Share and enjoy,
>> Markus
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer <markus@oberhumer.com>
>>
>>
>> [ Changes in v2: Optimize code for CPUs with inefficient unaligned
>>   access => significant speed increase on ARM ]
>>
>>
>> On 2012-07-16 20:30, Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I finally have prepared a small package that updates the LZO version
>>> in the Linux kernel. Please get it from:
>>>
>>> http://www.oberhumer.com/opensource/lzo/download/Testing/linux-kernel-lzo-20120716.tar.gz
>>>
>>> As stated in the README this version is significantly faster (typically more
>>> than 2 times faster!) than the current version, has been thoroughly tested on
>>> x86_64/i386/powerpc platforms and is intended to get included into the
>>> official Linux 3.6 or 3.7 release.
>>>
>>> I encourage all compression users to test and benchmark this new version,
>>> and I also would ask some official LZO maintainer to convert the updated
>>> source files into a GIT commit and possibly push it to Linus or linux-next.
>>>
>>> Share and enjoy,
>>> Markus
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer" <markus@oberhumer.com>
>
> --
> Markus Oberhumer, <markus@oberhumer.com>, http://www.oberhumer.com/



-- 
Thanks,
//richard

Re: [GIT PULL v2] Update LZO compression

[Andrew Morton]

On Wed, 3 Oct 2012 12:48:46 +0200
richard -rw- weinberger <richard.weinberger@gmail.com> wrote:

> CC'in akpm.

Thanks.

> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> I finally have prepared a small package that updates the LZO version
> >>> in the Linux kernel. Please get it from:
> >>>
> >>> http://www.oberhumer.com/opensource/lzo/download/Testing/linux-kernel-lzo-20120716.tar.gz
> >>>
> >>> As stated in the README this version is significantly faster (typically more
> >>> than 2 times faster!) than the current version, has been thoroughly tested on
> >>> x86_64/i386/powerpc platforms and is intended to get included into the
> >>> official Linux 3.6 or 3.7 release.
> >>>
> >>> I encourage all compression users to test and benchmark this new version,
> >>> and I also would ask some official LZO maintainer to convert the updated
> >>> source files into a GIT commit and possibly push it to Linus or linux-next.

No, lib/lzo has no identifiable maintainer.  I suggest you proceed as
follows:

- Post the entire patch series to lkml for review (I'd like a cc please)

- After that process has played out, ask Stephen to add this git tree
  to linux-next.

- After that process has played out, ask Linus to pull the tree
  during a merge window.

I haven't actually looked at the patches yet, but if they are as
extensive as they sound, it would be appropriate for you become the
formal maintainer of lib/lzo.

Re: [GIT PULL v2] Update LZO compression

[Andi Kleen]

> No, lib/lzo has no identifiable maintainer.  I suggest you proceed as
> follows:
> 
> - Post the entire patch series to lkml for review (I'd like a cc please)

Already happened, multiple people reviewed and tested.

This was just the patch ping.

-Andi
-- 
ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.

Re: [GIT PULL v2] Update LZO compression

[Andrew Morton]

On Wed, 3 Oct 2012 23:19:04 +0200
Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> wrote:

> > No, lib/lzo has no identifiable maintainer.  I suggest you proceed as
> > follows:
> > 
> > - Post the entire patch series to lkml for review (I'd like a cc please)
> 
> Already happened, multiple people reviewed and tested.

um, I would not consider "Looks ok to me from a quick look." and "I
couldn't tell from the github view, but I assume you follow standard
coding style." to indicate a rigorous code review!

That's the problem with the git presentation: hardly anyone reads the
patches and there is no patch for a reviewer to reply to.

So please send the patches out for review.  One at a time, via email.

Re: [GIT PULL v2] Update LZO compression

[Andi Kleen]

> > > - Post the entire patch series to lkml for review (I'd like a cc please)
> > 
> > Already happened, multiple people reviewed and tested.
> 
> um, I would not consider "Looks ok to me from a quick look." and "I
> couldn't tell from the github view, but I assume you follow standard
> coding style." to indicate a rigorous code review!

Let's put it like this. LZO is mature widely used production software and 
Markus wrote and maintains it.  Essentially this is a release from him.

The main problem before with using his version directly was that it did 
not follow Linux coding standards, but that seems to be fixed now. It's 
also relatively simple and at least I didn't spot anything bad when I looked.

It was runtime tested by several people on different architectures.
If it was fuzzed so we can assume reasonably good security.

-Andi 

-- 
ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.