Re: [PATCH -mm 0/5] LZO and swap write failure patches for -mm

[Adrian Bunk]

On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 11:56:46PM +0530, Nitin Gupta wrote:
> On 6/4/07, Richard Purdie <rpurdie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>...
>> The zlib code isn't kernel style and is arguably bloated, perhaps we
>> should remove that?
>
> I don't know - I don't use zlib.
> We can make LZO cleaner and perhaps faster. This will be good.
>...

"cleaner" = much harder to upgrade to new upstream LZO versions -> bad

"perhaps faster" = different from the well-known original code and
                   might again contain new bugs -> bad

"perhaps faster" = if we fork LZO and actually get it faster, all the 
                   other LZO users will not benefit -> bad


zlib and LZO are special because they are maintained userspace code 
imported into the kernel. 


> Regards,
> Nitin

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/