lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 14:29:22 +0100 From: Jörn Engel <joern@...fs.org> To: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] B+Tree library On Fri, 31 October 2008 14:16:14 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > +static inline size_t btree_visitorl(struct btree_headl *head, long opaque, > > + visitorl_t func2) > > +{ > > + return btree_visitor(&head->h, &btree_geo32, opaque, visitorl, func2); > > +} > > Incidentally, do you think it would be possible to implement a kind of > > btree_for_each_entry(e, ...) { > do something with e > } > > macro or function/macro combination? You seem to be doing a recursive > walk across the tree, would it be useful to have a linked list at the > lowest level of nodes to be able to iterate more easily? Maybe. On the whole, I've tried hard not to optimize much. The idea was that a simple design can still receive some fundamental changes. But once a number of neat tricks like a linked list at the lowest level are used, the code becomes more resistent to changes. That being said, the maze of function pointer around btree_visitor() does not make me very proud. Might be worth it. Jörn -- Prosperity makes friends, adversity tries them. -- Publilius Syrus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists