Re: choice of raid5 checksumming algorithm wrong ?

[Soeren Sonnenburg <kernel _at_ xxxxxx>]

On Sat, 2003-01-11 at 20:39, Rene Rebe wrote:
> Hi.
> 
> I also consider the kprint message a useability bug - and this is why
> I posted a patch that prints out that the algorithm is choosen to
> write "arround" the L2 cache ... - We patch this in our ROCK Linux
> standard patches ...

I would vote for such a cosmetic patch to be included...

Soeren.

> On: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 16:45:04 +0100,
>     Lionel Bouton <Lionel.Bouton _at_ inet6.fr> wrote:
> > Soeren Sonnenburg wrote:
> > 
> > >Hi!
> > >
> > >I really do wonder whether the displayed message is wrong or why it
> > >always chooses the slowest checksumming function (happens with 2.4.19 -
> > >21pre3)
> > >  
> > >
> > SSE is always preferred because unlike other checksumming code it 
> > doesn't use the processor caches when reading/writing data/checksum.
> > This is slower (if several GB/s can be considered slow) for the 
> > checksumming but far better for the overall system performance.
> > 
> > LB.
> 
> - Ren> 
> --  
> RenRebe - Europe/Germany/Berlin
> e-mail:   rene.rebe _at_ gmx.net, rene _at_ rocklinux.org
> web:      www.rocklinux.org, drocklinux.dyndns.org/rene/
> 
> Anyone sending unwanted advertising e-mail to this address will be
> charged $25 for network traffic and computing time. By extracting my
> address from this message or its header, you agree to these terms.


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