From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759453Ab3B0QJB (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:09:01 -0500 Received: from relais.videotron.ca ([24.201.245.36]:64256 "EHLO relais.videotron.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752265Ab3B0QI7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:08:59 -0500 MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:08:53 -0500 (EST) From: Nicolas Pitre To: Joe Perches Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux , Peter Korsgaard , "Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer" , Kyungsik Lee , Andrew Morton , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , Michal Marek , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, celinux-dev@lists.celinuxforum.org, Nitin Gupta , Richard Purdie , Josh Triplett , Joe Millenbach , David Sterba , Richard Cochran , Albin Tonnerre , Egon Alter , hyojun.im@lge.com, chan.jeong@lge.com, raphael.andy.lee@gmail.com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] Add support for LZ4-compressed kernel In-reply-to: <1361980152.2035.13.camel@joe-AO722> Message-id: References: <1361859870-15751-1-git-send-email-kyungsik.lee@lge.com> <512D1C12.4080109@oberhumer.com> <87fw0i7n6d.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk> <20130226221027.GW17833@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <1361929234.1924.8.camel@joe-AO722> <20130227095609.GY17833@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <1361980152.2035.13.camel@joe-AO722> User-Agent: Alpine 2.03 (LFD 1266 2009-07-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 27 Feb 2013, Joe Perches wrote: > https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/1/29/145 Connecting to lkml.org (lkml.org)|87.253.128.182|:443... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 500 Server Error > I did not and do not see significant value in > adding LZ4 given Markus' LZO improvements. Please someone post a comprehensive comparison with all the results in the same email. > The new LZO code is faster than ever and it's > a standalone improvement. > > Why would the LZO code not be updated? It is used by filesystems, etc. So of course it needs to be updated to faster code. > Markus has posted what seems a clean git pull > request. It was not cc'd to arm or linux-arch. > > http://linux-kernel.2935.n7.nabble.com/GIT-PULL-Update-LZO-compression-code-for-v3-9-td605184.html Maybe a reminder should be sent to Linus about this. >>From the above we can see this: **LZO-2013-UA : updated LZO version available in linux-next plus experimental ARM Unaligned Access patch. This needs approval from some ARM maintainer ist NOT YET INCLUDED. What is that experimental patch in need of approval? Nicolas