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/
