On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 05:57:27AM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 12:11:01PM +1000, Rusty Russell wrote:
> > This just seems like more optimization and complexity that we need. Interfaces
> > using vsnprintf don't seem like good candidates for optimization.
>
> That's a fair point, but I'm optimising for fewer trips into the
> slab(/slub/slob) allocator, and thus having less of an impact on the
> rest of the system. Given that 'an alloc on every call' was one of the
> complaints Matt had about my v1 stringbuf patch, I can't imagine he'll
> be happy about this one either.
Well I expect once you start letting people easily build strings by
concatenation, you'll very shortly afterwards have people using them
in loops. And having hidden O(n^2) behavior in there is a little sad,
even though n will tend to be small and well-bounded. If we can do
something simple to avoid it, we should.
--
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
