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;
Date:   Mon, 27 Nov 2017 08:14:57 -0800
From:   Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
To:     Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     acme@kernel.org, jolsa@redhat.com, mingo@redhat.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip 0/7] tools/perf: Update rbtree implementation and
 optimize users
Message-ID: <20171127161457.3gqxg2ex67whxtwu@linux-n805>
References: <20171127023046.19139-1-dave@stgolabs.net>
 <20171127060616.GA3070@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20171127060616.GA3070@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170421 (1.8.2)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, 26 Nov 2017, Andi Kleen wrote:

>> Applies on today's -tip tree. Please consider for v4.16.
>
>No numbers on the improvements?

I have not done performance tests perse for perf, but ultimately
it will depend a lot on the workload and size of the tree. I had
previously measured, on a Xeon E5-2450 @ 2.10GHz, the cost of
an rb_first() was ~60 cycles for 100 nodes, and ~75 cycles with
1000 nodes. fwiw.

Thanks,
Davidlohr

From 1585198250296106468@xxx Mon Nov 27 06:07:37 +0000 2017
X-GM-THRID: 1585184868937717447
X-Gmail-Labels: Inbox,Category Forums,HistoricalUnread