From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com>
Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111])
	by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5E697F50
	for <xfs@oss.sgi.com>; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 09:31:10 -0600 (CST)
Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25])
	by relay1.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC2848F8050
	for <xfs@oss.sgi.com>; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 07:31:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sandeen.net (sandeen.net [63.231.237.45]) by cuda.sgi.com with
	ESMTP id p00P5pTI2Jt1RiyF for <xfs@oss.sgi.com>;
	Fri, 31 Jan 2014 07:31:09 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <52EBC1AF.6020000@sandeen.net>
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 09:30:55 -0600
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: improve xfs_bitmap_empty()
References: <52EBAF91.10608@oracle.com> <52EBBC3D.5030507@sandeen.net>
	<52EBC103.5050006@oracle.com>
In-Reply-To: <52EBC103.5050006@oracle.com>
List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI <xfs.oss.sgi.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/options/xfs>,
	<mailto:xfs-request@oss.sgi.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://oss.sgi.com/pipermail/xfs>
List-Post: <mailto:xfs@oss.sgi.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xfs-request@oss.sgi.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs>,
	<mailto:xfs-request@oss.sgi.com?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com
Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com
To: Jeff Liu <jeff.liu@oracle.com>, "xfs@oss.sgi.com" <xfs@oss.sgi.com>

On 1/31/14, 9:28 AM, Jeff Liu wrote:
> 
> On 01/31 2014 23:07 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> On 1/31/14, 8:13 AM, Jeff Liu wrote:
>>> From: Jie Liu <jeff.liu@oracle.com>
>>>
>>> There is no need to travel through the whole bitmap items to verify
>>> if the bitmap array is empty or not, instead, just return 0 directly
>>> if an item is detected in bitmap array.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jie Liu <jeff.liu@oracle.com>
>>
>> Makes sense (and the long loop was my fault, I guess, but it's 
>> better than it was, see commit 24ad33f!)
> 
> Ah, you have killed a lots code there! :)
>> Reviewed-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
>>
>> I wonder if something like:
>>
>> return (find_first_set(map, size) == size);
>>
>> would be faster (or if it'd be worth it)...?
>> Probably not.  :)
>>
> 
> Well, when I looking through our bitmap source, I once thought if
> we can replace the current code with the generic bitmap library.
> However, our map is uint rather than unsigned long...

Technically the unsigned long (pointer) is just the bitmap address,
I think.

-Eric

> Otherwise, maybe some like find_first_bit(map, size) would be
> more convenient.
> 
> Thanks,
> -Jeff
> 

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs