On 2012-08-15 16:45, Johannes Stezenbach wrote:

On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 02:02:43PM +0200, Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer wrote:

quoted

On 2012-08-14 14:39, Johannes Stezenbach wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 01:44:02AM +0200, Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer wrote:

quoted

On 2012-07-16 20:30, Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer wrote:

quoted

As stated in the README this version is significantly faster (typically more
than 2 times faster!) than the current version, has been thoroughly tested on
x86_64/i386/powerpc platforms and is intended to get included into the
official Linux 3.6 or 3.7 release.

I encourage all compression users to test and benchmark this new version,
and I also would ask some official LZO maintainer to convert the updated
source files into a GIT commit and possibly push it to Linus or linux-next.

Sorry for not reporting earlier, but I didn't have time to do real
benchmarks, just a quick test on ARM926EJ-S using barebox,
and found in the new version decompression is slower:
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/barebox/2012-July/008268.html

I can only guess, but maybe your ARM cpu does not have an efficient
implementation of {get,put}_unaligned().

Yes, ARMv5 cannot do unaligned access.  ARMv6+ could, but
I think the Linux kernel normally traps it for debug,
all ARM seem to use generic {get,put}_unaligned() implementation
which use byte access and shift.

Hmm - I could imagine that we're wasting a lot of possible speed gain
by not exploiting that feature on ARMv6+.

quoted

Could you please try the following patch and test if you can see
any significant speed difference?

It isn't.  I made the attached quick hack userspace code
using ARM kernel headers and barebox unlzop code.
(new == your new code, old == linux-3.5 git, test == new + your suggested change)
(sorry I had no time to clean it up)

My suggested COPY4 replacement probably has a lot of load stalls - maybe some
ARM expert could have a look and suggest a more efficient implementation.

In any case, I still would like to see the new code in linux-next because
of the huge improvements on other modern CPUs.

Cheers,
Markus

I compressed a Linux Image with lzop (lzop <arch/arm/boot/Image >lzoimage)
and timed uncompression:

# time ./unlzopold <lzoimage >/dev/null
real    0m 0.29s
user    0m 0.19s
sys     0m 0.10s
# time ./unlzopold <lzoimage >/dev/null
real    0m 0.29s
user    0m 0.20s
sys     0m 0.09s
# time ./unlzopnew <lzoimage >/dev/null
real    0m 0.41s
user    0m 0.30s
sys     0m 0.10s
# time ./unlzopnew <lzoimage >/dev/null
real    0m 0.40s
user    0m 0.30s
sys     0m 0.10s
# time ./unlzopnew <lzoimage >/dev/null
real    0m 0.40s
user    0m 0.29s
sys     0m 0.11s
# time ./unlzoptest <lzoimage >/dev/null
real    0m 0.39s
user    0m 0.28s
sys     0m 0.11s
# time ./unlzoptest <lzoimage >/dev/null
real    0m 0.39s
user    0m 0.27s
sys     0m 0.11s
# time ./unlzoptest <lzoimage >/dev/null
real    0m 0.39s
user    0m 0.27s
sys     0m 0.11s

FWIW I also checked the sha1sum to confirm the Image uncompressed OK.


Johannes

-- 
Markus Oberhumer, [off-list ref], http://www.oberhumer.com/