Messages in this thread | | | From | Andy Shevchenko <> | Date | Wed, 28 Feb 2018 22:19:08 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] of: cache phandle nodes to reduce cost of of_find_node_by_phandle() |
| |
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 9:44 PM, Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com> wrote: > On 02/28/18 11:31, Andy Shevchenko wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 9:04 PM, <frowand.list@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The question is why O(1) is so important? O(log(n)) wouldn't work? > > O(1) is not critical. It was just a nice side result. > > >> Using radix_tree() I suppose allows to dynamically extend or shrink >> the cache which would work with DT overlays. > > The memory usage of the phandle cache in this patch is fairly small. > The memory overhead of a radix_tree() would not be justified.
OTOH the advantage I mentioned isn't a good argument?
-- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
| |