Re: Proposal: make RAID6 code optional

Andre Noll
2009-04-22T19:04:17Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 563 bytes --]

On 11:39, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Yes, I believe it would be easier than having dynamically allocated
> arrays. Dynamically generated arrays using static memory allocations
> (bss) is one thing, but that would only reduce size of the module on
> disk, which I don't think anyone considers a problem.

We would save 64K of RAM in the raid5-only case if we'd defer the
allocation of the multiplication table until the first raid6 array
is about to be started.

Andre
--
The only person who always got his work done by Friday was Robinson Crusoe

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]