Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 10 Sep 1999 02:57:39 +0200 (CEST) | From | Andrea Arcangeli <> | Subject | Re: [patch] longstanding chksum patch |
| |
On Fri, 10 Sep 1999, Artur Skawina wrote:
>Bottom line: there's no point in fixing an imaginary bug while >penalizing certain other legal cases. You always have to compromize, >choose between cache footprint vs raw speed, speed vs cpu resources >used (not only cached, but also btbs etc) etc etc. >If you can show a case where the so called bug is triggered _from_ >_user_ _space_ (or by net traffic)... [1] > >artur > >[1] and, even then, it's better to fix the cause, not the symptoms.
I _HATE_ dirty hacks which gives some more speed and that loses a clean interface. All string functions works careless about the alignment of the buffers, and the same should be done by the chksum routine. I don't want special cases just to get some more speed. I perfectly know that currently all callers are using 32bit aligned buffers, that's not my point at all.
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/
| |