[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B4245BB.5070302@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2010 11:47:07 -0800
From: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
CC: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
NetDEV list <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86: get more exact nr_irqs
On 01/04/2010 11:30 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 01/04/2010 11:16 AM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>
>> If we care about memory use efficiency let's replace irq_desc_ptrs
>> with a rbtree or a radix_tree. Something that moves the memory use
>> penalty onto those machines that have a lot of irqs.
>>
>
> rbtree doesn't make much sense for something that is addressed by index,
> and doesn't need to answer questions of the form "give me the highest
> member <= X". A hash table or radix tree makes sense, depending on the
> expected sparseness of the index.
will check if we can use radix with it like powerpc
YH
--
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