On 02/28/18 12:19, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 9:44 PM, Frank Rowand wrote:
>> On 02/28/18 11:31, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 9:04 PM, wrote:
>
>>> The question is why O(1) is so important? O(log(n))
On 02/28/18 12:19, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 9:44 PM, Frank Rowand wrote:
>> On 02/28/18 11:31, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 9:04 PM, wrote:
>
>>> The question is why O(1) is so important? O(log(n)) wouldn't work?
>>
>> O(1) is not critical. It was
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 2:19 PM, Andy Shevchenko
wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 9:44 PM, Frank Rowand wrote:
>> On 02/28/18 11:31, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 9:04 PM, wrote:
>
>>> The question
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 2:19 PM, Andy Shevchenko
wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 9:44 PM, Frank Rowand wrote:
>> On 02/28/18 11:31, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 9:04 PM, wrote:
>
>>> The question is why O(1) is so important? O(log(n)) wouldn't work?
>>
>> O(1) is not
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 9:44 PM, Frank Rowand wrote:
> On 02/28/18 11:31, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 9:04 PM, wrote:
>> The question is why O(1) is so important? O(log(n)) wouldn't work?
>
> O(1) is not critical. It was
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 9:44 PM, Frank Rowand wrote:
> On 02/28/18 11:31, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 9:04 PM, wrote:
>> The question is why O(1) is so important? O(log(n)) wouldn't work?
>
> O(1) is not critical. It was just a nice side result.
>
>
>> Using radix_tree()
On 02/28/18 11:31, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 9:04 PM, wrote:
>
>> Create a cache of the nodes that contain a phandle property. Use this
>> cache to find the node for a given phandle value instead of scanning
>> the devicetree to find the node. If
On 02/28/18 11:31, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 9:04 PM, wrote:
>
>> Create a cache of the nodes that contain a phandle property. Use this
>> cache to find the node for a given phandle value instead of scanning
>> the devicetree to find the node. If the phandle value is
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 9:04 PM, wrote:
> Create a cache of the nodes that contain a phandle property. Use this
> cache to find the node for a given phandle value instead of scanning
> the devicetree to find the node. If the phandle value is not found
> in the cache,
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 9:04 PM, wrote:
> Create a cache of the nodes that contain a phandle property. Use this
> cache to find the node for a given phandle value instead of scanning
> the devicetree to find the node. If the phandle value is not found
> in the cache, of_find_node_by_phandle()
From: Frank Rowand
Create a cache of the nodes that contain a phandle property. Use this
cache to find the node for a given phandle value instead of scanning
the devicetree to find the node. If the phandle value is not found
in the cache, of_find_node_by_phandle() will
From: Frank Rowand
Create a cache of the nodes that contain a phandle property. Use this
cache to find the node for a given phandle value instead of scanning
the devicetree to find the node. If the phandle value is not found
in the cache, of_find_node_by_phandle() will fall back to the tree
12 matches
Mail list logo