From: "Nitin Gupta" <nitingupta910@gmail.com>
To: "Richard Purdie" <richard@openedhand.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm-cc@laptop.org,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Satyam Sharma" <satyam.sharma@gmail.com>,
"Andrey Panin" <pazke@donpac.ru>, "Bret Towe" <magnade@gmail.com>,
"Michael-Luke Jones" <mlj28@cam.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: [RFC] LZO de/compression support - take 4
Date: Sat, 26 May 2007 16:51:17 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4cefeab80705260421x2af3d65bi868a1cb37c6bd633@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1180175325.5856.23.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Hi Richard,
On 5/26/07, Richard Purdie <richard@openedhand.com> wrote:
>
> I've been looking at my benchmark figures and I think I've found why the
> figures for my version were different to yours. Its not your code which
> is at fault, its the way it was hooked into the benchmarking program.
> The compiler was inlining some parts which it shouldn't have been
> allowed to do, sorry :-/.
>
> With that issue corrected, decompression is the same speed however
> compression is showing about a 9% performance loss compared to my kernel
> patch.
>
> I did some diffs of the assembler outputted by our two versions (mine
> matches minilzo). For decompression the output is effectively identical.
> For compression, there are significant differences. If I add a noinline
> attribute to lzo1x_compress_worker, that removes a lot of them (and
> boosts speed a bit) but there are still differences. Ideally, I'd like
> to understand why.
>
I will look more closely into compression code to see why you are
getting this perf. difference here.
Thanks for your tests.
- Nitin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-05-26 11:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-05-25 11:45 Nitin Gupta
2007-05-25 12:00 ` Michael-Luke Jones
2007-05-25 12:10 ` Richard Purdie
2007-05-25 12:37 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-25 13:38 ` Richard Purdie
2007-05-25 16:55 ` Daniel Hazelton
2007-05-25 18:45 ` Daniel Hazelton
2007-05-25 19:35 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-28 8:18 ` Daniel Hazelton
2007-05-28 8:37 ` Nitin Gupta
2007-05-28 8:43 ` Daniel Hazelton
2007-05-28 9:08 ` Nitin Gupta
2007-05-28 9:21 ` Daniel Hazelton
2007-05-28 9:46 ` Nitin Gupta
2007-05-28 9:58 ` Daniel Hazelton
2007-05-25 12:57 ` Nitin Gupta
2007-05-25 13:33 ` Richard Purdie
2007-05-26 10:28 ` Richard Purdie
2007-05-26 11:21 ` Nitin Gupta [this message]
2007-05-25 12:32 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-26 19:17 roland
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4cefeab80705260421x2af3d65bi868a1cb37c6bd633@mail.gmail.com \
--to=nitingupta910@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm-cc@laptop.org \
--cc=magnade@gmail.com \
--cc=mlj28@cam.ac.uk \
--cc=pazke@donpac.ru \
--cc=richard@openedhand.com \
--cc=satyam.sharma@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®