On 5/30/07, Adrian Bunk <[email protected]> wrote:
On Tue, May 29, 2007 at 11:10:05PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>
> On May 28 2007 19:11, Adrian Bunk wrote:
You completely miss the point of my question.
It's about the performance improvements of the modified code that were
mentioned.
What you are talking about shouldn't have any effect on the generated
code.
After Daniel refined this testing program, we can see that perf gain
is < 2% which can surely be accounted to cleanups like unnecessary
castings in tight loops.
Again, all the original code has been retained _as-is_. Whatever was
changed, has been mentioned in that detailed changelog that I post
along with patch.
If someone want to review these 500 lines with this changelog in hand,
it should not take more than couple of hours. If no-one can see any
problem in code by now and considering that it's tested on x86(_32),
amd64, ppc and giving somewhat better perf. than original then I
believe it is unnecessarily hanging outside of -mm tree.
I also contacted author (Markus Oberhumer) regarding above changes but
he seems not be responding right now. But still, if it gets into -mm
and gets used by various related projects then it should be good
enough for mainline also.
Cheers,
Nitin
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
