Re: [PATCH 05/13] rbtree: performance and correctness test

[Michel Lespinasse]

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 5:27 AM, Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 01:35:15 +0200, Michel Lespinasse <walken@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> +       for (i = 0; i < CHECK_LOOPS; i++) {
>> +               init();
>
> Is this init() needed?

So, the reasoning here is that we first have timed loops, where we
don't init between every iteration because it's not needed. Then we
have checked loops, where we init nodes between every iteration so
that they'll have new contents, and then check the rbtree invariants
after each insertion or erase. The init isn't required in the checked
loop either, but it should improve the test coverage a little. It'd be
pointless to run the checked loop more than once if we didn't init...

-- 
Michel "Walken" Lespinasse
A program is never fully debugged until the last user dies.
--
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/