From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 10/10] KVM: MMU: speed up mmu_unsync_walk
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 23:43:14 +0300
Message-ID: <48D80362.8070105@redhat.com>
References: <20080918212749.800177179@localhost.localdomain> <20080918213337.235766366@localhost.localdomain> <48D45160.6030208@redhat.com> <20080921004540.GD10120@dmt.cnet>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Ahern" <daahern@cisco.com>
To: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:34715 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751357AbYIVUnT (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 22 Sep 2008 16:43:19 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20080921004540.GD10120@dmt.cnet>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
>> Also, it may make sense to replace it with an array of u16s.
>>     
>
> Why?
>   

They'll be usually empty or near-empty, no? In which case the array is 
faster and smaller.

But I don't think the difference is measurable. So scratch that remark.

-- 
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.