On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 05:10:21PM -0700, Kenneth Graunke wrote: > No performance data has been gathered about this choice. I just don't > want that many hash tables.
Yup. This is not performance critical either, you simply should not be recreating that many handles from scratch - scalablity is far more important. It used to be a linear list which for a stress test of many hundreds of thousands of bo was unconscionable. I choose uthash simply for its license and convenience. Mesa should have a dense integer focused hash/idr. (And one day it will ;) Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
