[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140721143905.GA16454@amd.pavel.ucw.cz>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 16:39:05 +0200
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] PM / Hibernate: Memory bitmap scalability
improvements
On Mon 2014-07-21 16:29:51, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 01:45:07PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Ok, so you have sped it up from O(n) to O(log(n)) speed, and increased
> > memory requirements from O(n) to O(n * log(n)), right?
>
> No, new memory requirements are still ~O(n), because the additional pages
> needed for the index in the radix tree are outweighted by the memory
> saved by the smaller size of struct rtree_node compared to struct
> bm_block.
Are we in agreement how O() notation works?
So you reduced O(n) to O(n/2 log(n)) ... that's still O(n log(n)), right?
> You can also modify the above tool to give you some data to plot, then
> you will also SEE that there is still a linear relationship between RAM
> size and memory required by the old and new memory bitmap
> implementation.
I believe radix tree is O(log(N)) per operation, but its memory is
certainly not linear.
Yes, log(n) is looks quite constant even for huge n :-).
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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