On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Andrew Morton
wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Aug 2012 00:25:38 -0700
> Michel Lespinasse wrote:
>
>> This patchset goes over the rbtree changes that have been already integrated
>> into Andrew's -mm tree, as well as the augmented rbtree proposal which is
>> currently pending
On 08/30/2012 05:34 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
It would good to have solid acknowledgement from Rik that this approach
does indeed suit his pending vma changes.
It does. Michel's rbtree rework is exactly what I need.
I do not need the interval tree bits, but the faster
augmented rbtree is requi
On Tue, 7 Aug 2012 00:25:38 -0700
Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> This patchset goes over the rbtree changes that have been already integrated
> into Andrew's -mm tree, as well as the augmented rbtree proposal which is
> currently pending.
hm. Well I grabbed these for a bit of testing.
It's a larg
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 1:20 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-08-07 at 00:25 -0700, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
>> a faster worst-case complexity of O(k+log N) for stabbing queries in a
>> well-balanced prio tree, vs O(k*log N) for interval trees (where k=number
>> of matches, N=number of int
On Tue, 2012-08-07 at 00:25 -0700, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> a faster worst-case complexity of O(k+log N) for stabbing queries in a
> well-balanced prio tree, vs O(k*log N) for interval trees (where k=number
> of matches, N=number of intervals). Now this sounds great, but in practice
> prio trees
This patchset goes over the rbtree changes that have been already integrated
into Andrew's -mm tree, as well as the augmented rbtree proposal which is
currently pending.
Patch 1 implements support for interval trees, on top of the augmented
rbtree API. It also adds synthetic tests to compare the p
6 matches
Mail list logo
