Re: [PATCH] cksum: Use pclmul hardware instruction for CRC32 calculation

2021-03-13 Thread Jim Meyering
On Sat, Mar 13, 2021 at 10:19 AM Pádraig Brady wrote: > On 13/03/2021 16:13, Pádraig Brady wrote: > > FYI testing on an older i3-2310M system > shows the bottleneck is not near I/O (cat is much faster). > A 500MiB file improves from 1.40s to 0.67s on the i3-2310M. > > $ time src/cksum file.in >

Re: [PATCH] cksum: Use pclmul hardware instruction for CRC32 calculation

2021-03-13 Thread Pádraig Brady
On 13/03/2021 16:13, Pádraig Brady wrote: FYI testing on an older i3-2310M system shows the bottleneck is not near I/O (cat is much faster). A 500MiB file improves from 1.40s to 0.67s on the i3-2310M. $ time src/cksum file.in 3404199294 524288000 file.in real 0m0.672s user 0m0.584s sys

Re: [PATCH] cksum: Use pclmul hardware instruction for CRC32 calculation

2021-03-13 Thread Pádraig Brady
On 12/03/2021 15:33, Kristoffer Brånemyr wrote: Hi, I was just wondering if you are planning to merge the change, or if you decided against it? :) I wanted to use the cpuid.h autoconf detection for another patch I'm working on. We're still planning to include it. I'm making a few adjustments.

Re: differece between mkfifo and mknod ... p

2021-03-13 Thread Peng Yu
Thanks. Why is there such a redundancy? Is it for backward compatibility? If not for backward compatibility, I’d think mknod ... p should be removed, for this syntax is worse than that of mkfifo. On Sat, Mar 13, 2021 at 7:48 AM Steeve McCauley wrote: > Ah, sorry, yeah more or less identical when