Re: kernel 2.6 speed

- Original Message - From: "Florin Malita" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Linux Kernel Mailing List" Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 12:10 AM Subject: Re: kernel 2.6 speed > On 7/24/05, Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > time() isn't a hot > > path in the real world. > > That's what you woul

Re: kernel optimization

I submit that sparse switch jump table's are not an "unusual" construct in the Linux kernel/drivers. GCC only creates a table large enough to cover the largest of the sparse values - it doesn't have to be 0...255. 0...60 with 10 values sparsely scattered would generate a 61 element jump table. T

Re: kernel optimization

- Original Message - From: "Adrian Bunk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "christos gentsis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 16:14 Subject: Re: kernel optimization > > It's completely untested. > And since it's larger, it's also slower. Larger does not always mean slower. If

Re: reiser4 vs politics: linux misses out again

- Original Message - From: "Horst von Brand" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Ed Cogburn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Sent: Sunday, July 03, 2005 22:11 Subject: Re: reiser4 vs politics: linux misses out again > > The work involved in getting it into the kernel, workin with it while it is > there, a