Date
1 - 7 of 7
[PATCH v3 -next 5/5] Kconfig: Make x86 and arm kernels default to the LZ4-compressed
|
Kyungsik Lee <kyungsik.lee@...>
This patch makes x86 and arm kernels default to the LZ4-compressed
to test new LZ4 code in the linux-next. This is requested by Andrew Morton. Signed-off-by: Kyungsik Lee <kyungsik.lee@...> --- init/Kconfig | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/init/Kconfig b/init/Kconfig index fc8eb1f..de3cb00 100644 --- a/init/Kconfig +++ b/init/Kconfig @@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ config HAVE_KERNEL_LZ4 choice prompt "Kernel compression mode" - default KERNEL_GZIP + default KERNEL_LZ4 depends on HAVE_KERNEL_GZIP || HAVE_KERNEL_BZIP2 || HAVE_KERNEL_LZMA || HAVE_KERNEL_XZ || HAVE_KERNEL_LZO || HAVE_KERNEL_LZ4 help The linux kernel is a kind of self-extracting executable. -- 1.8.1.1 |
|
|
|
Borislav Petkov <bp@...>
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 08:47:36PM +0900, Kyungsik Lee wrote:
This patch makes x86 and arm kernels default to the LZ4-compressedDo I understand it correctly that when this thing gets committed, kernel builds on all systems missing the lz4 tool will fail and everybody should go running to get it so that everybody can build kernels again? WTF? -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine. -- |
|
|
|
Florian Fainelli <florian@...>
Hello,
On 03/05/2013 12:47 PM, Kyungsik Lee wrote: This patch makes x86 and arm kernels default to the LZ4-compressedI do not think making this the default is good idea, because the lz4demo utility that you need to actually compress the kernel (used in patch 2) is not installed nor available by default on most systems, while gzip is. Considering that such a concern was already raised in your v2 patchset, I am surprised to see this. -- Florian |
|
|
|
H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...>
I'm ok with this only if the patch is clearly marked LINUS DO NOT MERGE.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Kyungsik Lee <kyungsik.lee@...> wrote: This patch makes x86 and arm kernels default to the LZ4-compressed --
Sent from my mobile phone. Please excuse brevity and lack of formatting. |
|
|
|
Andrew Morton
On Tue, 05 Mar 2013 13:04:20 +0100 Florian Fainelli <florian@...> wrote:
Hello,Yes, that's a showstopper even for linux-next. What a shame. It means this code will walk into mainline with practically zero third-party testing. Oh well, the risk is minor. If it breaks, people can switch back to gzip easily enough. |
|
|
|
Florian Fainelli <florian@...>
On 03/06/2013 12:08 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Tue, 05 Mar 2013 13:04:20 +0100 Florian Fainelli <florian@...> wrote:If we want to have more coverage, how about importing the lz4demo utility source code to tools/lz4/, and change scripts/Makefile.lib to point at it? Once the lz4 utilities have reached a broader audience and are available with most distributions, we could revert back to assuming this utility can be found in PATH.Hello,Yes, that's a showstopper even for linux-next. What a shame. -- Florian |
|
|
|
Borislav Petkov <bp@...>
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 10:57:52AM +0100, Florian Fainelli wrote:
If we want to have more coverage, how about importing the lz4demoThat looks like on overkill to me, besides I don't think that's the purpose of tools/. Maybe everyone who wants to test this, should install the tool and go wild without disturbing the default. Thanks. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine. -- |
|
|