Re: [PATCH -mm 0/5] LZO and swap write failure patches for -mm

Adrian Bunk
2007-06-04T20:06:18Z

On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 11:56:46PM +0530, Nitin Gupta wrote:
> On 6/4/07, Richard Purdie <rpurdie@openedhand.com> wrote:
>...
>> The zlib code isn't kernel style and is arguably bloated, perhaps we
>> should remove that?
>
> I don't know - I don't use zlib.
> We can make LZO cleaner and perhaps faster. This will be good.
>...

"cleaner" = much harder to upgrade to new upstream LZO versions -> bad

"perhaps faster" = different from the well-known original code and
might again contain new bugs -> bad

"perhaps faster" = if we fork LZO and actually get it faster, all the
other LZO users will not benefit -> bad

zlib and LZO are special because they are maintained userspace code
imported into the kernel.

> Regards,
> Nitin

cu
Adrian

--

"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed