Re: 2.4.17 raid5 checksumming function selection wierdness

From: David S. Miller (davem@redhat.com)
Date: Fri Jan 11 2002 - 07:17:08 EST

Next message: Vladimir Kondratiev: "Re: __FUNCTION__ - patch for USB"
Previous message: Martin Mačok: "low latency versus sched O(1)"
In reply to: Anders Vedmar: "2.4.17 raid5 checksumming function selection wierdness"
Next in thread: Dave Jones: "Re: 2.4.17 raid5 checksumming function selection wierdness"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

From: Anders Vedmar <anders.vedmar@interactiveinstitute.se>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 13:12:53 +0100

   The raid5 code in 2.4.17 seems to select the slowest available
   checksumming function.

It does so because: 1) It performs better for the cache miss
case and 2) it is more cache friendly
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Vladimir Kondratiev: "Re: __FUNCTION__ - patch for USB"
Previous message: Martin Mačok: "low latency versus sched O(1)"
In reply to: Anders Vedmar: "2.4.17 raid5 checksumming function selection wierdness"
Next in thread: Dave Jones: "Re: 2.4.17 raid5 checksumming function selection wierdness"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 15 2002 - 21:00:35 EST