From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753592Ab2DWLiG (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Apr 2012 07:38:06 -0400 Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.122]:5155 "EHLO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752376Ab2DWLiD (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Apr 2012 07:38:03 -0400 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=MNHiabll c=1 sm=0 a=ZycB6UtQUfgMyuk2+PxD7w==:17 a=XQbtiDEiEegA:10 a=qp4yekXCDa0A:10 a=5SG0PmZfjMsA:10 a=Q9fys5e9bTEA:10 a=-_Ve-O37v_gQ9O5ZX24A:9 a=PUjeQqilurYA:10 a=ZycB6UtQUfgMyuk2+PxD7w==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Originating-IP: 74.67.80.29 Message-ID: <1335181077.28106.93.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/16] rtmutex: turn the plist into an rb-tree. From: Steven Rostedt To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Juri Lelli , tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, oleg@redhat.com, fweisbec@gmail.com, darren@dvhart.com, johan.eker@ericsson.com, p.faure@akatech.ch, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, claudio@evidence.eu.com, michael@amarulasolutions.com, fchecconi@gmail.com, tommaso.cucinotta@sssup.it, nicola.manica@disi.unitn.it, luca.abeni@unitn.it, dhaval.giani@gmail.com, hgu1972@gmail.com, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, raistlin@linux.it, insop.song@ericsson.com, liming.wang@windriver.com Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 07:37:57 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1335170023.28150.97.camel@twins> References: <1333696481-3433-1-git-send-email-juri.lelli@gmail.com> <1333696481-3433-13-git-send-email-juri.lelli@gmail.com> <1334178715.23924.308.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> <1335170023.28150.97.camel@twins> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2012-04-23 at 10:33 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, 2012-04-11 at 17:11 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > > I have to ask. Why not just add a rbtree with a plist? That is, add all > > deadline tasks to the rbtree and all others to the plist. As plist has a > > O(1) operation, and rbtree does not. We are making all RT tasks suffer > > the overhead of the rbtree. > > You always love to add complexity to stuff before making it work, don't > you ;-) Nah, I like the make it work first, then optimize. But I wanted to bring this up as a concern. After benchmarks, it may not be an issue anyway. I just don't want to forget about doing the benchmarks. -- Steve