From: Kent Overstreet <koverstreet@google.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Kent Overstreet <koverstreet@google.com>,
tj@kernel.org, axboe@kernel.dk, paul.gortmaker@windriver.com
Subject: [PATCH 0/3] Generic rb tree code
Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 13:57:38 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1337979461-19654-1-git-send-email-koverstreet@google.com> (raw)
Right now, users of the rb tree code have to open code their own search and
insert functions. This provides generic versions that you pass a comparison
function to.
I highly doubt the extra function calls are going to have a measurable
performance impact in practice - the pointer chasing is going to dominate. I
did provide inline versions just in case, though - it's modelled after the
spinlock code.
The inline version of rb_search() is important for another reason, though - you
have to pass rb_search a pointer to your struct for it to compare against,
which has to be allocated on the stack. For most users I think that'll be fine,
but for the elevator code struct rb_node is embedded in struct request, which
is rather large. By using the inline version that stack allocation goes away.
(I looked at the generated assembly of elv_rb_find() before and after, and if
I'm reading it right it's not using any extra stack. Code is a bit worse, but
IMO removing code duplication is worth it).
Kent Overstreet (3):
rbtree: Add rb_insert(), rb_search(), etc.
timerqueue: convert to generic rb tree code
block: convert elevator to generic rb tree code
block/elevator.c | 42 ++++++------------
include/linux/rbtree.h | 110 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
lib/rbtree.c | 28 ++++++++++++
lib/timerqueue.c | 23 ++++------
4 files changed, 159 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-)
--
1.7.9.3.327.g2980b
next reply other threads:[~2012-05-25 20:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-05-25 20:57 Kent Overstreet [this message]
2012-05-25 20:57 ` [PATCH 1/3] rbtree: Add rb_insert(), rb_search(), etc Kent Overstreet
2012-05-28 23:35 ` Tejun Heo
2012-05-25 20:57 ` [PATCH 2/3] timerqueue: convert to generic rb tree code Kent Overstreet
2012-05-25 20:57 ` [PATCH 3/3] block: convert elevator " Kent Overstreet
2012-05-28 23:17 ` Tejun Heo
2012-05-29 3:25 ` Kent Overstreet
2012-05-29 5:24 ` Tejun Heo
2012-05-29 6:57 ` Kent Overstreet
2012-05-28 23:22 ` [PATCH 0/3] Generic " Tejun Heo
2012-05-29 3:30 ` Kent Overstreet
2012-05-29 5:28 ` Tejun Heo
2012-05-31 21:03 ` Jan Kara
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=1337979461-19654-1-git-send-email-koverstreet@google.com \
--to=koverstreet@google.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul.gortmaker@windriver.com \
--cc=tj@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