Koen Vandeputte <koen.vandepu...@ncentric.com> wrote: > > On 2017-09-05 19:29, L. D. Pinney wrote: > > i7 4770K <--- Yes we all have these plus 64 GB of RAM don't we ? > This is not relevant as the benchmark was provided to show > relative differences .. (percentage) > > > I really understand your concern and I don't mind if the > patches get rejected (really :) ) > > But in this case, please be straightforward and: > - Ask for rejecting of this one: [1] > - Submit a new patch requesting to revert this patch too :) [2] Sure, but [1] (turn on multithreading for xz) hasn't been accepted, and effectively appears to be dead. _if_ that goes in, I absolutely agree that the toolchain should be the same as the SDK. If it _doesn't_ go in, I'd say really that the SDK should be put back to bz2 to be consistent with the toolchain :) > > > Why is xz valid for SDK but not for toolchain? (see commit msg > from [2] for size differences) > > [1] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/802620/ > [2] > https://git.lede-project.org/?p=source.git;a=commit;h=9f61ccd9e34fab1a1b90b846c1144e885401e70a > > > > I've done some benchmarks on a machine here (i7 4770K): > > > > > > tar bz2: 0m19.271s (now) > > tar cfJ: 1m3.384s > > xz: 1m19.958s (patch) > > xz - T 0: 0m38.587s (Future with -T 0 ?) > > > > > > [1] http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/802620/ > > > > > > Koen > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Lede-dev mailing list > > Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org <mailto:Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org> > > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev >
signature.html
Description: OpenPGP Digital Signature
_______________________________________________ Lede-dev mailing list Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
