From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Cc: riel@redhat.com, vrajesh@umich.edu, daniel.santos@pobox.com,
aarcange@redhat.com, dwmw2@infradead.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] rbtree based interval tree as a prio_tree replacement
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 10:20:39 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1344846039.31459.14.camel@twins> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1344324343-3817-1-git-send-email-walken@google.com>
On Tue, 2012-08-07 at 00:25 -0700, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> a faster worst-case complexity of O(k+log N) for stabbing queries in a
> well-balanced prio tree, vs O(k*log N) for interval trees (where k=number
> of matches, N=number of intervals). Now this sounds great, but in practice
> prio trees don't realize this theorical benefit. First, the additional
> constraint makes them harder to update, so that the kernel implementation
> has to simplify things by balancing them like a radix tree, which is not
> always ideal.
Not something spending a great deal of time on, but do you have any idea
what the radix like balancing does the the worst case stabbing
complexity?
Anyway, I like the thing, that prio-tree code always made my head hurt.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-13 8:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-08-07 7:25 [PATCH 0/5] rbtree based interval tree as a prio_tree replacement Michel Lespinasse
2012-08-07 7:25 ` [PATCH 1/5] rbtree: add prio tree and interval tree tests Michel Lespinasse
2012-08-07 7:25 ` [PATCH 2/5] mm: replace vma prio_tree with an interval tree Michel Lespinasse
2012-08-14 12:11 ` Hillf Danton
2012-08-07 7:25 ` [PATCH 3/5] kmemleak: use rbtree instead of prio tree Michel Lespinasse
2012-08-08 17:07 ` Michel Lespinasse
2012-08-09 8:31 ` Catalin Marinas
2012-08-15 16:36 ` Catalin Marinas
2012-08-15 20:53 ` Michel Lespinasse
2012-08-16 15:06 ` Catalin Marinas
2012-08-07 7:25 ` [PATCH 4/5] prio_tree: remove Michel Lespinasse
2012-08-07 7:25 ` [PATCH 5/5] rbtree: move augmented rbtree functionality to rbtree_augmented.h Michel Lespinasse
2012-08-08 1:19 ` Michel Lespinasse
2012-08-13 8:20 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2012-08-13 10:37 ` [PATCH 0/5] rbtree based interval tree as a prio_tree replacement Michel Lespinasse
2012-08-30 21:34 ` Andrew Morton
2012-08-30 21:43 ` Rik van Riel
2012-08-30 22:33 ` Michel Lespinasse
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=1344846039.31459.14.camel@twins \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=daniel.santos@pobox.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=vrajesh@umich.edu \
--cc=walken@google.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).