Hi Rasmus,
On 12/03/2019 17:33, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
I noticed that the O(n log n) behaviour of free_lpi_range could easily be made O(n) (patch 4), though I don't suppose n is ever large enough to actually matter. While there, I also stumbled on two other micro-optimizations (2 and 3).
n is usually in the range 1 .. nr_cpus, so pretty small, even on the biggest machines we have around (256 threads). And actually, nobody ever frees LPIs, because hey, why would you?
Then while writing the commit log for the last patch, I noticed that the cmp callback I was removing was actually buggy, so I went back and added a patch in front suitable for -stable. I'll leave it to others to decide if it's important enough for that.
Thanks for that. I'll have a look at the whole thing anyway (I've just glanced over it so far).
Please note that this is only compile-tested.
Right, this needs some actual testing then. /me needs to build a guest that shakes the allocator a bit.
Cheers,
M.