Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 9 Aug 2012 02:46:37 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/5] [RFC] Add volatile range management code | From | Michel Lespinasse <> |
| |
On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 8:57 PM, John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org> wrote: > v5: > * Drop intervaltree for prio_tree usage per Michel & > Dmitry's suggestions.
Actually, I believe the ranges you need to track are non-overlapping, correct ?
If that is the case, a simple rbtree, sorted by start-of-range address, would work best. (I am trying to remove prio_tree users... :)
> + /* First, find any existing intervals that overlap */ > + prio_tree_iter_init(&iter, root, start, end);
Note that prio tree iterations take intervals as [start; last] not [start; end[ So if you want to stick with prio trees, you would have to use end-1 here.
> + /* Coalesce left-adjacent ranges */ > + prio_tree_iter_init(&iter, root, start-1, start);
Same here; you probably want to use start-1 on both ends
> + node = prio_tree_next(&iter); > + while (node) {
I'm confused, I don't think you ever expect more than one range to match, do you ???
> + /* Coalesce right-adjacent ranges */ > + prio_tree_iter_init(&iter, root, end, end+1);
Same again, here you probably want end on both ends
This is far from a complete code review, but I just wanted to point out a couple details that jumped to me first. I am afraid I am missing some of the background about how the feature is to be used to really dig into the rest of the changes at this point :/
-- Michel "Walken" Lespinasse A program is never fully debugged until the last user dies.
| |