On 29.05.2017 14:45, Alexey Budankov wrote:
On 29.05.2017 14:23, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 01:56:05PM +0300, Alexey Budankov wrote:
On 29.05.2017 13:43, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Why can't the tree do both?
Well, indeed, the tree provides such capability too. However
switching to
the full tree iteration in cases where we now go through _groups
lists will
enlarge the patch, what is probably is not a big deal. Do you think
it is
worth implementing the switch?
Do it as a series of patches, where patch 1 introduces the tree, patches
2 through n convert the list users into tree users, and patch n+1
removes the list.
Well ok, let's do that additionally but please expect delay in delivery
(I am OOO till Jun 14).
addressed in v3.
I think its good to not have duplicate data structures if we can avoid
it.
yeah, makes sense.
