On Mon, 2017-09-25 at 10:14 -0600, David Ahern wrote: > Thanks for the test. > > I made a simple program this morning and ran it under perf. With the > above suggestion the rb_erase has a high cost because it always deletes > the root node. Your method 1 has a high cost on rb_first which is > expected given its definition and it is run on each removal. Both > options increase in time with the number of entries in the tree. > > Your method 2 is fairly constant from 10,000 entries to 10M entries > which makes sense: a one time cost at finding rb_first and then always > removing a bottom node so rb_erase is light. > > As for the change: > > Acked-by: David Ahern <dsah...@gmail.com>
Thanks a lot for double checking !
