On 02/28/18 12:19, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 9:44 PM, Frank Rowand <frowand.list@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 02/28/18 11:31, Andy Shevchenko wrote: >>> On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 9:04 PM, <frowand.list@xxxxxxxxx> 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? No. Deleting and re-creating the cache to resize it (when applying an overlay) would be a rare event that would happen as desired by the overlay application code. There is no real gain by having extension or shrinkage occur automatically and if the overlay application code desires the resizing it is trivial to implement (a single function call). -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
