Re: [ANN] Squashfs 3.0 released

[Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>]

On Fri 17-03-06 12:25:44, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Phillip Lougher wrote:
> >On 17 Mar 2006, at 16:00, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> >>Jörn Engel wrote:
> >>>>>The one still painfully missing is a
> >>>>>fixed-endianness disk format.
> 
> >>Fixed endian isn't necessarily a requirement.  
> >>Detectable endian  is.  As long as (a) the filesystem 
> >>mkfs notes the endian-ness and  (b) the kernel 
> >>filesystem code properly handles both types of  endian, 
> >>life is fine.
> >>
> >That's what is currently done.  There are two filesystem 
> >formats, big  endian (donated by Squashfs magic of 
> >'sqsh') and little endian  (denoted by Squashfs magic of 
> >'hsqs').  The kernel code detects the  filesystem 
> >endianness and swaps if necessary.
> 
> Well, then, I don't see a need to change anything.  As I 
> said, [consistent and] detectable endian is the real 
> requirement.  For SquashFS's users, I would think they 
> would prefer the current situation (selectable endian) to 
> fixed endian, because many SquashFS users need to squeeze 
> every ounce of performance out of severely 
> resource-constrained devices.
> 
> I have two routers, ADM5120-based Edimax and LinkSys 
> WRT54G v5, both of which have a mere 2MB of flash, and 
> both use SquashFS to maximize that space.  And both are 
> el cheapo, slow embedded processors that run far slower 
> than 300Mhz.  I look askance at anyone who wants to make 
> an arbitrary filesystem design decision imposing tons of 
> bytesex upon these lowly devices.

gzip is already pretty expensive, I'd say. Is not byteswap lost in
noise?

-- 
Thanks, Sharp!