linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] rbtree based interval tree as a prio

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 linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1344846039.31459.14.camel@twins>
Date:	Mon, 13 Aug 2012 10:20:39 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>
Cc:	riel@...hat.com, vrajesh@...ch.edu, daniel.santos@...ox.com,
	aarcange@...hat.com, dwmw2@...radead.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] rbtree based interval tree as a prio_tree
 replacement

On Tue, 2012-08-07 at 00:25 -0700, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> a faster worst-case complexity of O(k+log N) for stabbing queries in a
> well-balanced prio tree, vs O(k*log N) for interval trees (where k=number
> of matches, N=number of intervals). Now this sounds great, but in practice
> prio trees don't realize this theorical benefit. First, the additional
> constraint makes them harder to update, so that the kernel implementation
> has to simplify things by balancing them like a radix tree, which is not
> always ideal. 

Not something spending a great deal of time on, but do you have any idea
what the radix like balancing does the the worst case stabbing
complexity?

Anyway, I like the thing, that prio-tree code always made my head hurt.
--
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/