From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] make radix tree gang lookup faster by using a bitmap search
Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 20:19:49 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1125278389.5048.30.camel@mulgrave> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050828175233.61cada23.akpm@osdl.org>
On Sun, 2005-08-28 at 17:52 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > +#if BITS_PER_LONG == 32
> > +#define RADIX_TREE_MAP_SHIFT 5
> > +#elif BITS_PER_LONG == 64
> > ...
> > struct radix_tree_node {
> > - unsigned int count;
> > void *slots[RADIX_TREE_MAP_SIZE];
> > - unsigned long tags[RADIX_TREE_TAGS][RADIX_TREE_TAG_LONGS];
> > + unsigned long tags[RADIX_TREE_TAGS];
> > };
>
> I don't see why the above change was necessary? Why not stick with the
> current more flexible sizing option?
>
> Note that the RADIX_TREE_MAP_FULL trick can still be used. It just has to
> be put inside a `for (idx = 0; idx < RADIX_TREE_TAG_LONGS; idx++)' loop,
> which will vanish if RADIX_TREE_TAG_LONGS==1.
Well ... It's my opinion (and purely unsubstantiated, I suppose) that
it's more efficient on 32 bit platforms to do bit operations on 32 bit
quantities, which is why I changed the radix tree map shift to 5 for
that case.
It also makes much cleaner code than having to open code checks on
variable sized bitmaps.
James
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-08-29 1:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-08-27 16:26 James Bottomley
2005-08-27 17:53 ` Andrew Morton
2005-08-28 19:43 ` James Bottomley
2005-08-28 20:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-08-28 20:39 ` Andrew Morton
2005-08-29 0:45 ` James Bottomley
2005-08-29 0:52 ` Andrew Morton
2005-08-29 1:19 ` James Bottomley [this message]
2005-08-29 1:35 ` Andrew Morton
2005-08-29 3:26 ` James Bottomley
2005-08-29 3:37 ` Nick Piggin
2005-08-29 3:54 ` Trond Myklebust
2005-08-29 13:16 ` Luben Tuikov
2005-08-29 15:01 ` James Bottomley
[not found] ` <20050829164144.GC9508@localhost.localdomain>
2005-08-30 0:56 ` Nick Piggin
2005-08-30 1:54 ` Andrew Morton
2005-08-30 2:46 ` James Bottomley
2005-08-30 2:53 ` Nick Piggin
[not found] ` <20050830052405.GB20843@localhost.localdomain>
2005-08-30 13:06 ` Nick Piggin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1125278389.5048.30.camel@mulgrave \
--to=james.bottomley@steeleye.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome