[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20211109105840.GA9675@lst.de>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2021 11:58:40 +0100
From: "hch@....de" <hch@....de>
To: "Wang, Zhi A" <zhi.a.wang@...el.com>
Cc: "hch@....de" <hch@....de>,
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
Zhi Wang <zhi.wang.linux@...il.com>,
"joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com" <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>,
"Vivi, Rodrigo" <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
"zhenyuw@...ux.intel.com" <zhenyuw@...ux.intel.com>,
"jgg@...dia.com" <jgg@...dia.com>,
"intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org" <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
"intel-gvt-dev@...ts.freedesktop.org"
<intel-gvt-dev@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
"dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] i915/gvt: seperate tracked MMIO table from
handlers.c
On Tue, Nov 09, 2021 at 10:51:27AM +0000, Wang, Zhi A wrote:
> Can you elaborate more about this? We need the hash query from the table
> ASAP when the hypervisor trapped a mmio access. It's a critical path and
> we tried different data structure in the kernel and the hash table gives
> the best performance.
Ok, I misunderstood the hashtable.h interface. hash_for_each_possible
actually does a hash lookup instead of an interation despite the rather
misleading name.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists