Re: PR/50638 CVS commit: src/sys/lib/libsa

[Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%britannica.bec.de@localhost>]

The following reply was made to PR bin/50638; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%britannica.bec.de@localhost>
To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
Cc: gnats-admin%netbsd.org@localhost, netbsd-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost, tsutsui%ceres.dti.ne.jp@localhost
Subject: Re: PR/50638 CVS commit: src/sys/lib/libsa
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2016 15:19:50 +0100

 On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 02:10:01PM +0000, Michael van Elst wrote:
 > The following reply was made to PR bin/50638; it has been noted by GNATS.
 > 
 > From: mlelstv%serpens.de@localhost (Michael van Elst)
 > To: gnats-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost
 > Cc: 
 > Subject: Re: PR/50638 CVS commit: src/sys/lib/libsa
 > Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2016 14:04:49 +0000 (UTC)
 > 
 >  joerg%britannica.bec.de@localhost (Joerg Sonnenberger) writes:
 >  
 >  >cost/benefit analysis. More importantly, it hacks around the symptoms
 >  >and doesn't solve the real problem.
 >  
 >  I agree with you that removing the crc check isn't necessary. But
 >  what do you think the real problem is? A non-optimal math routine or
 >  a feature being impractical for the user?
 
 Look back at the earlier number -- loading a compressed kernel needs ten
 times as much time as zcat from userland. The amount of time spend in
 crc32 in either variant, even the bad current libsa version, pales in
 comparision. The reason for that factor is almost guaranteed the seeking
 in loadfile. I asked if there is a good reason for seeking (or
 discarding the data for that matter) before the recent commits, since
 that is the issue where 90% of the wasted times goes. I still haven't
 received an answer to that question.
 
 Joerg