[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdXBnxTaKB4io4j4jbbUh+QU0b_Fj8zYi_K_7NZSE33YpQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 May 2016 22:38:20 +0200
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To: Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@...sulko.com>
Cc: Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>,
Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
Matt Porter <mporter@...sulko.com>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
Koen Kooi <koen@...inion.thruhere.net>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
Marek Vasut <marex@...x.de>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Pantelis Antoniou <panto@...oniou-consulting.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] of: Support hashtable lookups for phandles
Hi Pantelis,
On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 8:11 PM, Pantelis Antoniou
<pantelis.antoniou@...sulko.com> wrote:
> --- a/drivers/of/base.c
> +++ b/drivers/of/base.c
> @@ -1073,9 +1097,14 @@ struct device_node *of_find_node_by_phandle(phandle handle)
> return NULL;
>
> raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&devtree_lock, flags);
> - for_each_of_allnodes(np)
> - if (np->phandle == handle)
> - break;
> + /* when we're ready use the hash table */
> + if (of_phandle_ht_available() && !in_interrupt())
I guess the !in_interrupt() test is because of the locking inside
rhashtable_lookup_fast()?
> + np = of_phandle_ht_lookup(handle);
> + else { /* fallback */
> + for_each_of_allnodes(np)
> + if (np->phandle == handle)
> + break;
> + }
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Powered by blists - more mailing lists