On Fri, 2012-02-24 at 15:41 -0600, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-02-10 at 15:46 -0500, Michael Meissner wrote:
> > I was looking at the routelookup EEMBC benchmark and it has code of the
> > form:
> >
> > while ( this_node->cmpbit > next_node->cmpbit )
> > {
> > this_node = next_node;
> >
> > if ( proute->dst_addr & (0x1 << this_node->cmpbit) )
> > next_node = this_node->rlink;
> > else
> > next_node = this_node->llink;
> > }
> >
>
> Andrew and Richard both suggested this would be better handled as a tree
> optimization. Here is a proposed patch to do that.
I think this is slightly different from what was suggested by me. Since
my suggestion has to deal with the load from this_node->cmpbit taken
into account and not just because this_node->rlink and this_node->llink
might be in the same page.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
