> From: Seth Jennings [mailto:sjenning@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Subject: [PATCHv6 0/8] zswap: compressed swap caching > > Changelog: > > v6: > * fix improper freeing of rbtree (Cody) Cody's bug fix reminded me of a rather fundamental question: Why does zswap use a rbtree instead of a radix tree? Intuitively, I'd expect that pgoff_t values would have a relatively high level of locality AND at any one time the set of stored pgoff_t values would be relatively non-sparse. This would argue that a radix tree would result in fewer nodes touched on average for lookup/insert/remove. Do you have evidence that rbtree is better here? (Preferably over a set of workloads larger than kernbench and SPECjbb ;-) Or are there other important design issues that disqualify a radix tree? In the end, I guess either one (rbtree or radix tree) will work, but it would be nice to get this kind of fundamental design issue properly solved before merging is to be considered. Dan _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
