diff options
author | Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com> | 2019-07-16 16:27:45 -0700 |
---|---|---|
committer | Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> | 2019-07-16 19:23:22 -0700 |
commit | 9f973cb38088e0cf42e0bae97ff140813e623f13 (patch) | |
tree | eee4545125e037873c8bf29ec1d5ff6064d2e456 /include/linux/rbtree.h | |
parent | 4ab7ace465466d25c12cee9854e7140077e208cb (diff) |
lib/rbtree: avoid generating code twice for the cached versions
As was already noted in rbtree.h, the logic to cache rb_first (or
rb_last) can easily be implemented externally to the core rbtree api.
Change the implementation to do just that. Previously the update of
rb_leftmost was wired deeper into the implmentation, but there were some
disadvantages to that - mostly, lib/rbtree.c had separate instantiations
for rb_insert_color() vs rb_insert_color_cached(), as well as rb_erase()
vs rb_erase_cached(), which were doing exactly the same thing save for
the rb_leftmost update at the start of either function.
text data bss dec hex filename
5405 120 0 5525 1595 lib/rbtree.o-vanilla
3827 96 0 3923 f53 lib/rbtree.o-patch
[dave@stgolabs.net: changelog addition]
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190628171416.by5gdizl3rcxk5h5@linux-r8p5
[akpm@linux-foundation.org: coding-style fixes]
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190628045008.39926-1-walken@google.com
Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Acked-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'include/linux/rbtree.h')
-rw-r--r-- | include/linux/rbtree.h | 70 |
1 files changed, 46 insertions, 24 deletions
diff --git a/include/linux/rbtree.h b/include/linux/rbtree.h index e6337fce08f2..1fd61a9af45c 100644 --- a/include/linux/rbtree.h +++ b/include/linux/rbtree.h @@ -32,25 +32,9 @@ struct rb_root { struct rb_node *rb_node; }; -/* - * Leftmost-cached rbtrees. - * - * We do not cache the rightmost node based on footprint - * size vs number of potential users that could benefit - * from O(1) rb_last(). Just not worth it, users that want - * this feature can always implement the logic explicitly. - * Furthermore, users that want to cache both pointers may - * find it a bit asymmetric, but that's ok. - */ -struct rb_root_cached { - struct rb_root rb_root; - struct rb_node *rb_leftmost; -}; - #define rb_parent(r) ((struct rb_node *)((r)->__rb_parent_color & ~3)) #define RB_ROOT (struct rb_root) { NULL, } -#define RB_ROOT_CACHED (struct rb_root_cached) { {NULL, }, NULL } #define rb_entry(ptr, type, member) container_of(ptr, type, member) #define RB_EMPTY_ROOT(root) (READ_ONCE((root)->rb_node) == NULL) @@ -72,12 +56,6 @@ extern struct rb_node *rb_prev(const struct rb_node *); extern struct rb_node *rb_first(const struct rb_root *); extern struct rb_node *rb_last(const struct rb_root *); -extern void rb_insert_color_cached(struct rb_node *, - struct rb_root_cached *, bool); -extern void rb_erase_cached(struct rb_node *node, struct rb_root_cached *); -/* Same as rb_first(), but O(1) */ -#define rb_first_cached(root) (root)->rb_leftmost - /* Postorder iteration - always visit the parent after its children */ extern struct rb_node *rb_first_postorder(const struct rb_root *); extern struct rb_node *rb_next_postorder(const struct rb_node *); @@ -87,8 +65,6 @@ extern void rb_replace_node(struct rb_node *victim, struct rb_node *new, struct rb_root *root); extern void rb_replace_node_rcu(struct rb_node *victim, struct rb_node *new, struct rb_root *root); -extern void rb_replace_node_cached(struct rb_node *victim, struct rb_node *new, - struct rb_root_cached *root); static inline void rb_link_node(struct rb_node *node, struct rb_node *parent, struct rb_node **rb_link) @@ -136,4 +112,50 @@ static inline void rb_link_node_rcu(struct rb_node *node, struct rb_node *parent typeof(*pos), field); 1; }); \ pos = n) +/* + * Leftmost-cached rbtrees. + * + * We do not cache the rightmost node based on footprint + * size vs number of potential users that could benefit + * from O(1) rb_last(). Just not worth it, users that want + * this feature can always implement the logic explicitly. + * Furthermore, users that want to cache both pointers may + * find it a bit asymmetric, but that's ok. + */ +struct rb_root_cached { + struct rb_root rb_root; + struct rb_node *rb_leftmost; +}; + +#define RB_ROOT_CACHED (struct rb_root_cached) { {NULL, }, NULL } + +/* Same as rb_first(), but O(1) */ +#define rb_first_cached(root) (root)->rb_leftmost + +static inline void rb_insert_color_cached(struct rb_node *node, + struct rb_root_cached *root, + bool leftmost) +{ + if (leftmost) + root->rb_leftmost = node; + rb_insert_color(node, &root->rb_root); +} + +static inline void rb_erase_cached(struct rb_node *node, + struct rb_root_cached *root) +{ + if (root->rb_leftmost == node) + root->rb_leftmost = rb_next(node); + rb_erase(node, &root->rb_root); +} + +static inline void rb_replace_node_cached(struct rb_node *victim, + struct rb_node *new, + struct rb_root_cached *root) +{ + if (root->rb_leftmost == victim) + root->rb_leftmost = new; + rb_replace_node(victim, new, &root->rb_root); +} + #endif /* _LINUX_RBTREE_H */ |