From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
randy.dunlap@osdl.org, Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>,
lkml - Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Keith Owens <kaos@sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Sort kallsyms in name order: kernel shrinks by 30k
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 09:16:56 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1084317416.17692.29.camel@bach> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040511080843.GB8751@colin2.muc.de>
On Tue, 2004-05-11 at 18:08, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Tue, May 11, 2004 at 03:08:55PM +1000, Rusty Russell wrote:
> > Admittedly, anyone who sets CONFIG_KALLSYMS doesn't care about space,
> > it's a fairly trivial change.
>
> As long as nobody does binary search it's good. Wonder why I did not
> have this idea already with the original stem compression change ;-)
ISTR that someone (I thought you) mentioned doing this before.
In general this code was considered non-speed-critical, but Keith points
out its use in wchan. A simple cache might make more sense there,
however.
A binary search as stands doesn't help much because we still need to
iterate through the names. We could do "address, nameindex" pairs, but
with stem compression we need to at least wade back some way to decode
the name.
I have a 30-line static huffman decoder (from the IDE mini-oopser) which
we could use instead of stem compression, which we could combine with
"address, bitoffset" pairs which would be about 20k smaller and faster
than the current approach, but is it worth the trouble?
Thoughts welcome,
Rusty.
--
Anyone who quotes me in their signature is an idiot -- Rusty Russell
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-05-11 23:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-05-11 5:08 [PATCH] Sort kallsyms in name order: kernel shrinks by 30k Rusty Russell
2004-05-11 5:23 ` Keith Owens
2004-05-11 8:08 ` Andi Kleen
2004-05-11 15:35 ` Randy.Dunlap
2004-05-11 23:16 ` Rusty Russell [this message]
2004-05-12 1:47 ` Matt Mackall
2004-05-12 6:00 ` Andi Kleen
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-05-13 0:05 Albert Cahalan
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=1084317416.17692.29.camel@bach \
--to=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=ak@muc.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=kaos@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=randy.dunlap@osdl.org \
--cc=sam@ravnborg.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