| Message ID | 510F16C9.2060901@oberhumer.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 03:02:49AM +0100, Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer wrote: > At least akpm did approve the LZO update for inclusion into 3.7, but the code > still has not been merged into the main tree. > > On 2012-10-09 21:26, Andrew Morton wrote: > > [...] > > The changes look OK to me. Please ask Stephen to include the tree in > > linux-next, for a 3.7 merge. > > Well, this probably means I have done a rather poor marketing. I assume this code is sitting in *your* tree? How do you think it gets into mainline? There is no automatic way that code from linux-next gets merged into mainline. That is up to the tree owner to make happen, either by getting their tree into a parent maintainers tree, or if there is none, asking Linus to pull your tree at the appropriate time.
On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 10:50:52AM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 03:02:49AM +0100, Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer wrote: > > At least akpm did approve the LZO update for inclusion into 3.7, but the code > > still has not been merged into the main tree. > > > On 2012-10-09 21:26, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > [...] > > > The changes look OK to me. Please ask Stephen to include the tree in > > > linux-next, for a 3.7 merge. > > > > Well, this probably means I have done a rather poor marketing. > > I assume this code is sitting in *your* tree? How do you think it gets > into mainline? > > There is no automatic way that code from linux-next gets merged into > mainline. That is up to the tree owner to make happen, either by getting > their tree into a parent maintainers tree, or if there is none, asking > Linus to pull your tree at the appropriate time. My feeling is that in this case it is unneccessarily hard for an outside contributor to get a patch accepted, all because get_maintainer.pl doesn't put someone in charge. Apparently it doesn't work to put all the usual maintainer responsibilities onto the shoulders of a Linux development novice. Thus it would be nice if some maintainer would come forward and offer to handle the patches for Markus. Thanks, Johannes
commit 8745b927fcfcd6953ada9bd1220a73083db5948a
Author: Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer <markus@oberhumer.com>
Date: Mon Feb 4 02:26:14 2013 +0100
lib/lzo: huge LZO decompression speedup on ARM by using unaligned access
Signed-off-by: Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer <markus@oberhumer.com>
diff --git a/lib/lzo/lzo1x_decompress_safe.c b/lib/lzo/lzo1x_decompress_safe.c
index 569985d..e3edc5f 100644
--- a/lib/lzo/lzo1x_decompress_safe.c
+++ b/lib/lzo/lzo1x_decompress_safe.c
@@ -72,9 +72,11 @@ copy_literal_run:
COPY8(op, ip);
op += 8;
ip += 8;
+# if !defined(__arm__)
COPY8(op, ip);
op += 8;
ip += 8;
+# endif
} while (ip < ie);
ip = ie;
op = oe;
@@ -159,9 +161,11 @@ copy_literal_run:
COPY8(op, m_pos);
op += 8;
m_pos += 8;
+# if !defined(__arm__)
COPY8(op, m_pos);
op += 8;
m_pos += 8;
+# endif
} while (op < oe);
op = oe;
if (HAVE_IP(6)) {
diff --git a/lib/lzo/lzodefs.h b/lib/lzo/lzodefs.h
index 5a4beb2..b230601 100644
--- a/lib/lzo/lzodefs.h
+++ b/lib/lzo/lzodefs.h
@@ -12,8 +12,14 @@
*/
+#if 1 && defined(__arm__) && ((__LINUX_ARM_ARCH__ >= 6) || defined(__ARM_FEATURE_UNALIGNED))
+#define CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS 1
+#define COPY4(dst, src) \
+ * (u32 *) (void *) (dst) = * (const u32 *) (const void *) (src)
+#else
#define COPY4(dst, src) \
put_unaligned(get_unaligned((const u32 *)(src)), (u32 *)(dst))
+#endif
#if defined(__x86_64__)
#define COPY8(dst, src) \
put_unaligned(get_unaligned((const u64 *)(src)), (u64 *)(dst))