From: Kuan-Wei Chiu <visitorckw@gmail.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: xavier_qy@163.com, longman@redhat.com, lizefan.x@bytedance.com,
hannes@cmpxchg.org, mkoutny@suse.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
jserv@ccns.ncku.edu.tw, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] Enhance union-find with KUnit tests and optimization improvements
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2024 14:19:21 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZwTO6c8fapOdGXGi@visitorckw-System-Product-Name> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZwQJ_hQENEE7uj0q@slm.duckdns.org>
Hi Tejun,
On Mon, Oct 07, 2024 at 06:19:10AM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2024 at 11:28:27PM +0800, Kuan-Wei Chiu wrote:
> > This patch series adds KUnit tests for the union-find implementation
> > and optimizes the path compression in the uf_find() function to achieve
> > a lower tree height and improved efficiency. Additionally, it modifies
> > uf_union() to return a boolean value indicating whether a merge
> > occurred, enhancing the process of calculating the number of groups in
> > the cgroup cpuset.
>
> I'm not necessarily against the patchset but this probably is becoming too
> much polishing for something which is only used by cpuset in a pretty cold
> path. It probably would be a good idea to concentrate on finding more use
> cases.
>
I hesitated for a while before sending this patch series, as I was unsure
if these optimizations were worthwhile. As you pointed out, it is only
used in cpuset and isn't in a performance-critical path. However, since
the union-find implementation is placed under lib/, I thought this
suggested an expectation of more potential users in the future (otherwise,
it might have been placed directly within cpuset). These patches might
eventually benefit other users down the line. Additionally, except for the
patch that adds kunit tests, the rest involve only small changes of fewer
than 10 lines each. That’s why I decided to go ahead and submit them.
I agree that these changes would be more meaningful if more users could
benefit from them, and I'll try to explore further use cases. I understand
maintainers are busy, and if this patch series seems like unnecessary
changes, I apologize for any wasted time.
Regards,
Kuan-Wei
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-08 6:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-07 15:28 Kuan-Wei Chiu
2024-10-07 15:28 ` [PATCH v2 1/6] lib/union_find: Add EXPORT_SYMBOL() for uf_find() and uf_union() Kuan-Wei Chiu
2024-10-09 14:55 ` Waiman Long
2024-10-07 15:28 ` [PATCH v2 2/6] lib/union_find: Change uf_union() return type to bool Kuan-Wei Chiu
2024-10-07 15:28 ` [PATCH v2 3/6] lib: Add KUnit tests for union-find implementation Kuan-Wei Chiu
2024-10-07 15:28 ` [PATCH v2 4/6] lib/union_find: Optimize uf_find() with enhanced path compression Kuan-Wei Chiu
2024-10-07 15:28 ` [PATCH v2 5/6] cgroup/cpuset: Optimize domain counting using updated uf_union() Kuan-Wei Chiu
2024-10-08 14:02 ` Waiman Long
2024-10-08 16:45 ` Kuan-Wei Chiu
2024-10-08 20:00 ` Waiman Long
2024-10-07 15:28 ` [PATCH v2 6/6] MAINTAINERS: Add Kuan-Wei as co-maintainer for union-find Kuan-Wei Chiu
2024-10-07 16:19 ` [PATCH v2 0/6] Enhance union-find with KUnit tests and optimization improvements Tejun Heo
2024-10-08 6:19 ` Kuan-Wei Chiu [this message]
2024-10-17 7:10 ` Using union-find in BPF verifier (was: Enhance union-find with KUnit tests and optimization improvements) Shung-Hsi Yu
2024-10-17 8:08 ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-10-21 17:14 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2024-10-19 0:07 ` Kuan-Wei Chiu
2024-10-09 9:09 ` [PATCH v2 0/6] Enhance union-find with KUnit tests and optimization improvements Christoph Hellwig
2024-10-09 11:15 ` Kuan-Wei Chiu
2024-10-09 14:13 ` Kuan-Wei Chiu
2024-10-09 14:53 ` Waiman Long
2024-10-09 16:41 ` Tejun Heo
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=ZwTO6c8fapOdGXGi@visitorckw-System-Product-Name \
--to=visitorckw@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=jserv@ccns.ncku.edu.tw \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lizefan.x@bytedance.com \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=xavier_qy@163.com \
/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