From: Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>
To: Mingming Cao <cmm@us.ibm.com>
Cc: akpm@osdl.org, "Stephen C. Tweedie" <sct@redhat.com>,
Badari Pulavarty <pbadari@us.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"ext2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net"
<ext2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] ext3 reservation remove stale window fix
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 20:32:39 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20041019013239.GT31237@waste.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1098148283.9754.1090.camel@w-ming2.beaverton.ibm.com>
On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 06:11:16PM -0700, Mingming Cao wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-10-18 at 16:41, Matt Mackall wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 03:55:04PM -0700, Mingming Cao wrote:
> > >
> > > Before we changed the per-filesystem reservations from a linked list
> > > to a red-black tree, in order to speed up the linear search from the
> > > list head, we keep the current(stale) reservation window as a
> > > reference pointer to skip the nodes prior to the current/stale
> > > window node, when failed to allocate a new window in current group
> > > and try to do allocation in next group.
> >
> > One wonders whether a prio tree of the sort used by the current VMA
> > searching code would be a better match to the problem than the
> > red-black approach.
>
> Could you please elaborate more? I think the current VMA code is using
> red-black tree in their searching code(find_vma()).
I was thinking of the priority search tree stuff in mm/prio_tree.c.
But on further reflection, they're not really advantageous here as the
windows in question are non-overlapping and the RB approach looks
perfectly sensible.
--
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-10-19 1:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-10-18 22:55 [PATCH 1/3] ext3 reservation remove stale window fix Mingming Cao
2004-10-18 23:41 ` Matt Mackall
2004-10-19 1:11 ` Mingming Cao
2004-10-19 1:32 ` Matt Mackall [this message]
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=20041019013239.GT31237@waste.org \
--to=mpm@selenic.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=cmm@us.ibm.com \
--cc=ext2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbadari@us.ibm.com \
--cc=sct@redhat.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