Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 21 Sep 2010 19:42:02 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 03/10] jump label v11: base patch | From | "Andi Kleen" <> |
| |
> > If all you need is exact matches -- as in this case -- hashes are > generally faster than binary anyway.
Actually only if you have the whole thing in cache. The binary search has a much nicer access pattern if it's cache cold.
And the footprint of directly accessing the section than having separate large list and tables is also significantly more compared to a compact table.
But I don't think the access speed really matters here. Toggling trace points should be rare and is not a critical path operation. What matters is runtime overhead and simplicity.
Right now on the simplicity front there is a problem.
-Andi
| |