Re: Proposal: make RAID6 code optional

["H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>]

Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> writes:
> 
>> Bill Davidsen wrote:
>>> It would seem that that space could be allocated and populated when
>>> raid6 was first used, as part of the initialization. I haven't looked at
>>> that code since it was new, so I might be optimistic about doing it that
>>> way.
>> We could use vmalloc() and generate the tables at initialization time.
>> However, having a separate module which exports the raid6 declaration
>> and uses the raid5 module as a subroutine library seems easier.
>>
>> 	-hpa
> 
> Combine the two.
> 
> The raid6 module initializes the tables for raid6 and uses the raid5
> module as subroutine library.
> 

It really doesn't make sense at all.  It's easier at that point to
retain the static tables.

	-hpa


-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.