Message-ID: <1335871228.13683.141.camel@twins>
Subject: Re: Generic rbtree search & insert cores
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: daniel.santos@pobox.com
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Date: Tue, 01 May 2012 13:20:28 +0200
In-Reply-To: <4F9E7365.2040907@att.net>
References: <4F9E7365.2040907@att.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Mime-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1169
Lines: 29

On Mon, 2012-04-30 at 06:11 -0500, Daniel Santos wrote:
> 
> So as long as our struct rbtree_relationship is a compile-time
> constant, the generated code will look pretty much (if not exactly)
> like that of the example code in rbtree.h.  Please let me know what
> you think.  I've tested this in a userspace program, but haven't fully
> stress tested it in kernelspace yet. 

Right, this ought to work.

I'm not sure the root_offset thing is worth it though, passing in the
rb_root pointer isn't much of a hassle, in fact I'd expect to pass rb
related pointers to a function called rbtree_insert().

Also, using a macro to create the rbtree_relationship thing would make
it easier. Something like:

	RB_RELATION(struct mouse, node, name, name_cmp);

I'd think you'd also want to provide an insertion variant that does the
leftmost thing, that's used in several places, and you'd also need one
for the augmented rb-tree.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/