Re: [ANN] Squashfs 3.0 released

[Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>]

On Tue, Mar 21, 2006 at 08:03:38PM +0000, Phillip Lougher wrote:
> Pavel Machek wrote:
> >
> >Al is right. Unconditional swap is probably faster than
> >branch. Avoiding swaps is nice, but avoiding branches is probably more
> >important.
> 
> Quite possible.
> 
> >
> >Can you try to benchmark it? I believe it is going to be lost in
> >noise, slow cpus or not.
> 
> Good idea, I'll try to benchmark it (on a slow CPU if I can find one :-) 
> ).  It will probably make no difference.
> 
> I don't want the lack of a fixed endianness on disk to become a problem. 
>   I personally don't think the use of, or lack of a fixed endianness to 
> be that important, but I'd prefer not to change the current situation 
> and adopt a fixed format.  I use big endian systems almost exclusively, 
> and I don't like the way fixed formats always tend to be little-endian.

You mean, like IP?  Or NFS?  Or XFS?  Or any number of other big-endian
data layouts?  Make it fixed to big-endian - no problem with that...