Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] Add support for LZ4-compressed kernel

Joe Perches
2013-02-27T15:49:15Z

On Wed, 2013-02-27 at 09:56 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 05:40:34PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-02-26 at 22:10 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > So... for a selected kernel version of a particular size, can we please
> > > have a comparison between the new LZO code and this LZ4 code, so that
> > > we can see whether it's worth updating the LZO code or replacing the
> > > LZO code with LZ4?
> >
> > How could it be questionable that it's worth updating the LZO code?
>
> Please read the comments against the previous posting of these patches
> where I first stated this argument - and with agreement from those
> following the thread. The thread started on 26 Jan 2013. Thanks.

https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/1/29/145

I did not and do not see significant value in
adding LZ4 given Markus' LZO improvements.

I asked about LZO.

Why would the LZO code not be updated?

The new LZO code is faster than ever and it's
a standalone improvement.

Markus has posted what seems a clean git pull
request. It was not cc'd to arm or linux-arch.