On 09/16/2017 05:58 PM, Joe Perches wrote: > On Sat, 2017-09-16 at 17:36 +0800, Ying Xue wrote: >> On 09/16/2017 05:26 PM, Joe Perches wrote: >>> On Sat, 2017-09-16 at 17:02 +0800, Ying Xue wrote: >>>> On 09/16/2017 03:50 PM, Thomas Meyer wrote: >>>>> Use common library function rather than explicitly coding >>>>> some variant of it yourself. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Meyer <tho...@m3y3r.de> >>>> >>>> Acked-by: Ying Xue <ying....@windriver.com> >>> >>> Are you sure you want to do this? >>> >>> Note the comment above nameseq_find_subseq >>> >>> * Very time-critical, so binary searches through sub-sequence array. >>> >>> What impact does this change have on performance? >> >> Sorry, I couldn't see any essential difference between this new >> implementation and the original one except that the former tries to use >> the library function - bsearch() to replace the original binary search >> algorithm implemented in TIPC itself. Therefore, I don't think the >> change will have a big impact on performance. >> >> If I miss something, please let me know. > > Comparison via a function pointer in bsearch is slower > than direct code without the function call overhead. >
Right, but probably we can tolerate the slight sacrifice here. >
