Re: [patch] longstanding chksum patch

Andrea Arcangeli (andrea@suse.de)
Fri, 10 Sep 1999 00:34:21 +0200 (CEST)


On Fri, 10 Sep 1999, Artur Skawina wrote:

>from my tests further unrolling was a _small_ win when everything was
>cached, didn't make much difference with cold caches, and isn't probably
>worth it.

IMHO when the chksum become a big bottleneck for performances you
should have the cache hot. I think it worth to optimize the bottleneck
case.

Anyway I am not very concerned about such minor performance improvement so
if you want to drop the performance part of the patch (the copy-and-chksum
one) I don't care at _all_. I only would like to have the known and
documented bug fixed.

Andrea

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