Received: by 2002:a25:1506:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 6csp4827726ybv; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 04:16:49 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzCuIgjxXpNUMpdPCqOKmAZFuh1URQSHb8HoW4m0nScUq6IG/J8nZSRu6evc2/suKWB+stD X-Received: by 2002:a54:4182:: with SMTP id 2mr2589706oiy.14.1581423408963; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 04:16:48 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1581423408; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=nuU6kDqdQfxWFE79qO8QqmZI2Hr8hRbMCdtF3jHZYTPpFS4EnDGNUhOeN5yxLA47x5 8rg9SalPH14Wkxa92div2VZnS7boIf+z9nqe/Ol0vmb5hft4esbL1L1P65FrZSvz6PD8 SFakTbCdiXzRiGmGA/zjIKS62nQjD5rOsPwJARPEMUW4O19Wwsp7/s1nJtCluvWfDYcy 3t0Iy97rGy0bopymL7tGUzF7V80+2wJwj7Si5bCqtOy9Tg3jkCKfUr6zOAmzmy+JRdY9 A/91utaTObK52L+8aMM4hqvk0T83Xve2UrhOoT8UJRLZVsjosDf+/+Tx+LlCiShHCvY0 +hbA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date; bh=v1DwG1gUvNkUdjou7ZjxS17/UkDBwIeQl+xzKXrV6Eo=; b=etX1VEgHZUzSBiVny453XD3qJVkQex38VDAYLSPoKZkWse/gwFDOEyxFoljLi6PqKJ lT3Yqu/OjtnoIslhy7ClX53dcQw1ZVomSrOFGZ05dH17Dzlbn0lRZvzqh+XCE8ChyQqb nIu+b7Uuu/0nsEay871ovPiNQ0k3jRQbgogRxygGltU9tD/C4vHiGROQMG9q6CLXBuoD f7KgyzYPZ407thyCMHC9U6rZx0pjg0ItUO8R2qV5V84fyeM/lAVbTyEUtgiJl2JsU3bq dO74ZylbfZZ3i0u3NXLYLnPBgX8J2JORBp7ec9X2itYLgCIQ2ZFyZiF2oUcOZJeGhinp b0Wg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id p191si1622500oic.257.2020.02.11.04.16.37; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 04:16:48 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728591AbgBKLUS (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 11 Feb 2020 06:20:18 -0500 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:44266 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727728AbgBKLUS (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Feb 2020 06:20:18 -0500 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A62C431B; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 03:20:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (unknown [10.37.6.21]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2B9D73F6CF; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 03:20:17 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 11:20:15 +0000 From: Mark Brown To: Davidlohr Bueso Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mcgrof@kernel.org, alex.williamson@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH -next 0/5] rbtree: optimize frequent tree walks Message-ID: <20200211112015.GA4543@sirena.org.uk> References: <20200207180305.11092-1-dave@stgolabs.net> <20200209174632.9c7b6ff20567853c05e5ee58@linux-foundation.org> <20200210155611.lfrddnolsyzktqne@linux-p48b> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="PNTmBPCT7hxwcZjr" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200210155611.lfrddnolsyzktqne@linux-p48b> X-Cookie: Hire the morally handicapped. User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --PNTmBPCT7hxwcZjr Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 07:56:11AM -0800, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: > On Sun, 09 Feb 2020, Andrew Morton wrote: > > And... are these patches really worth merging? Complexity is added, > > but what end-user benefit can we expect? > Yes they are worth merging, imo (which of course is biased :) > I don't think there is too much added complexity overall, particularly > considering that the user conversions are rather trivial. And even for > small trees (ie 100 nodes) we still benefit in a measurable way from > these optimizations. As I said in reply to the regmap patch I'm really unconvinced that any benefit will outweigh the increased memory costs for that usage. --PNTmBPCT7hxwcZjr Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAABCgAdFiEEreZoqmdXGLWf4p/qJNaLcl1Uh9AFAl5Cje4ACgkQJNaLcl1U h9BI3wf/RM/7hz/NcSo1FY7gwc9ios3UpRitKEzeTHBNDzL3Moju+iJr4Jxf0sPc BpvuaCegd/t8SRMrCvPkkqOrb4fk837cA/TS4rMykS85IbZzxU6peH9CeFz2d0Lb HNlXKgjrLurotci9uZEdt7tMQG0R5x4LLYe9QWz6qsAe5MzPJC2fc+6vedv3iXpq vHZz+VwLYtJdaLV71J2sRLDIdla9Y2jItZZp5zUc+e8AG3usbcGxIMZ9lQw6UfhA v610j9wj5GzHbJoixRliOUSI0pGWh5co1h6Q3XIzmItnclRHEssKG+5FrtVFyPoN 7B96qQt/upVFFEBozb4IxbB53+8ExQ== =cavX -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --PNTmBPCT7hxwcZjr--