From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.fh-wedel.de ([213.39.232.198] helo=moskovskaya.fh-wedel.de) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.42 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1ChAMS-00034Q-UB for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 12:33:22 -0500 Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 18:33:13 +0100 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F6rn?= Engel To: Joakim Tjernlund Message-ID: <20041222173313.GF9783@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> References: <20041222155624.GA9783@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Linux MTD mailing list Subject: Re: JFFS3 & performance List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, 22 December 2004 17:39:08 +0100, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > > OK, then there might be worth considering a reverse checksum. Looks like it. > This generates a little better code on PPC. > Not tested. Thanks. Imo this variant is less readable and doesn't help i386, so I'll ignore it for now. If an i386-optimized engel32 is in the adler32 range, I'll get back to it. If not, let's just drop the whole idea. > > BTW: I reject the name "Engler32". Few names are worse than > > "engel32", but that one is. ;) > > I am so sorry, I felt something was wrong when I wrote that but I didn't > check, my bad. No offense taken. Btw, if you know a better name, that would be nice. There should be quite a few, I'm just too lazy to think of one. Jörn -- Fancy algorithms are slow when n is small, and n is usually small. Fancy algorithms have big constants. Until you know that n is frequently going to be big, don't get fancy. -- Rob Pike