On Wed, 04 Sep 2019, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
Hi Davidlohr,
On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 5:52 PM Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
Ok, so for that I've added the following helper which will make the
conversion a bit more straightforward:
#define vma_interval_tree_foreach_stab(vma, root, start)
On Wed, 04 Sep 2019, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
I do not have time for a full review right now, but I did have a quick
pass at it and it does seem to match the direction I'd like this to
take.
Thanks, and no worries, I consider all this v5.5 material anyway.
Please let me know if you'd like
Hi Davidlohr,
On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 5:52 PM Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> Ok, so for that I've added the following helper which will make the
> conversion a bit more straightforward:
>
> #define vma_interval_tree_foreach_stab(vma, root, start)
>vma_interval_tree_foreach(vma, root, start,
On Thu, 22 Aug 2019, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
I think vma_interval_tree is a bit of a mixed bag, but mostly leans
towards using half closed intervals.
Right now vma_last_pgoff() has to do -1 because of the interval tree
using closed intervals. Similarly, rmap_walk_file(), which I consider
to
On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 9:49 PM Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Aug 2019, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> >I'm not sure where to go with this - would it make sense to add a new
> >interval tree header file that uses [start,end) intervals (with the
> >thought of eventually converting all current
I think vma_interval_tree is a bit of a mixed bag, but mostly leans
towards using half closed intervals.
Right now vma_last_pgoff() has to do -1 because of the interval tree
using closed intervals. Similarly, rmap_walk_file(), which I consider
to be the main user of the vma_interval_tree, also
On Wed, 21 Aug 2019, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
As I had commented some time ago, I wish the interval trees used [start,end)
intervals instead of [start,last] - it would be a better fit for basically
all of the current interval tree users.
So the vma_interval_tree (which is a pretty important
On Wed, 21 Aug 2019, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 03:46:18PM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
o The border cases for overlapping differ -- interval trees are closed,
while memtype intervals are open. We need to maintain semantics such
that conflict detection and getting the
On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 03:46:18PM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> o The border cases for overlapping differ -- interval trees are closed,
> while memtype intervals are open. We need to maintain semantics such
> that conflict detection and getting the lowest match does not change.
Agree on the
On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 03:46:18PM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/pat_rbtree.c b/arch/x86/mm/pat_rbtree.c
> index fa16036fa592..1be4d1856a9b 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/pat_rbtree.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/pat_rbtree.c
> @@ -34,68 +34,41 @@
> * memtype_lock protects the
With some considerations, the custom pat_rbtree implementation can be
simplified to use most of the generic interval_tree machinery.
o The tree inorder traversal can slightly differ when there are key
('start') collisions in the tree due to one going left and another right.
This, however, only
11 matches
Mail list logo
