[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZwaPdSOMWQzuoPWU@visitorckw-System-Product-Name>
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2024 22:13:09 +0800
From: Kuan-Wei Chiu <visitorckw@...il.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: xavier_qy@....com, longman@...hat.com, lizefan.x@...edance.com,
tj@...nel.org, hannes@...xchg.org, mkoutny@...e.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, jserv@...s.ncku.edu.tw,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] Enhance union-find with KUnit tests and
optimization improvements
On Wed, Oct 09, 2024 at 02:09:51AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2024 at 11:28:27PM +0800, Kuan-Wei Chiu wrote:
> > This patch series adds KUnit tests for the union-find implementation
> > and optimizes the path compression in the uf_find() function to achieve
> > a lower tree height and improved efficiency. Additionally, it modifies
> > uf_union() to return a boolean value indicating whether a merge
> > occurred, enhancing the process of calculating the number of groups in
> > the cgroup cpuset.
>
> Given that this fairly special union find code is obly used in the
> cpuset code, please move the code there rather adding more exports.
> Even as-is it is bloating every kernel build even without cgroups
> for no good reason.
>
I noticed that it was Michal who originally suggested putting the
union-find code to lib/ in an earlier email thread [1]. Before I send a v3
patch moving it to cpuset, I'd like to hear Michal, Tejun, and Waiman’s
thoughts on this change.
[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/wu4m2m5igc752s5vrmtsnd7ekaq6opeqdtrzegs7oxlwgypdcx@qhcnow5txxiv/
Regards,
Kuan-Wei
Powered by blists - more mailing lists