Re: [PATCH 03/10] jump label v11: base patch

[Steven Rostedt]

On Tue, 2010-09-21 at 16:41 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> >
> > So there are ~150 tracepoints, but this code is also being proposed for
> > use with 'dynamic debug' of which there are > 1000, and I'm hoping for
> > more users moving forward.
> 
> Even 1000 is fine to walk, but if it was sorted a binary search
> would be much faster anyways. That is then you would still
> need to search for each module, but that is a relatively small
> number (< 100)

xfs has > 100 tracepoints

> 
> > Also, I think the hash table deals nicely with modules.
> 
> Maybe but it's also a lot of code. And it seems to me
> that it is optimizing the wrong thing. Simpler is nicer.

I guess simplicity is in the eye of the beholder. I find hashes easier
to deal with than binary searching sorted lists. Every time you add a
tracepoint, you need to resort the list.

Hashes are much easier to deal with and scale nicely. I don't think
there's enough rational to switch this to a binary list.

-- Steve


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