From: Namhyung Kim
Current collapse stage has a scalability problem which can be
reproduced easily with parallel kernel build. This is because it
needs to traverse every children of callchain linearly during the
collapse/merge stage. Convert it to rbtree reduced the overhead
significantly.
On
From: Namhyung Kim namhyung@lge.com
Current collapse stage has a scalability problem which can be
reproduced easily with parallel kernel build. This is because it
needs to traverse every children of callchain linearly during the
collapse/merge stage. Convert it to rbtree reduced the
Hi Frederic,
On Tue, 8 Oct 2013 21:22:45 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 11:03:16AM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>> On Wed, 2 Oct 2013 12:18:28 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>> > Have you tested this patchset when collapsing is not used?
>> > There are fair chances
Hi Frederic,
On Tue, 8 Oct 2013 21:22:45 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 11:03:16AM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
On Wed, 2 Oct 2013 12:18:28 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
Have you tested this patchset when collapsing is not used?
There are fair chances that this
On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 11:03:16AM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Oct 2013 12:18:28 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 05:58:03PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> >> From: Namhyung Kim
> >>
> >> Current collapse stage has a scalability problem which can be
> >>
On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 11:03:16AM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
On Wed, 2 Oct 2013 12:18:28 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 05:58:03PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
From: Namhyung Kim namhyung@lge.com
Current collapse stage has a scalability problem which can be
On Wed, 2 Oct 2013 12:18:28 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 05:58:03PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>> From: Namhyung Kim
>>
>> Current collapse stage has a scalability problem which can be
>> reproduced easily with parallel kernel build. This is because it
>> needs to
On Wed, 2 Oct 2013 12:18:28 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 05:58:03PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
From: Namhyung Kim namhyung@lge.com
Current collapse stage has a scalability problem which can be
reproduced easily with parallel kernel build. This is because it
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 05:58:03PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> From: Namhyung Kim
>
> Current collapse stage has a scalability problem which can be
> reproduced easily with parallel kernel build. This is because it
> needs to traverse every children of callchain linearly during the
>
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 05:58:03PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
From: Namhyung Kim namhyung@lge.com
Current collapse stage has a scalability problem which can be
reproduced easily with parallel kernel build. This is because it
needs to traverse every children of callchain linearly during
From: Namhyung Kim
Current collapse stage has a scalability problem which can be
reproduced easily with parallel kernel build. This is because it
needs to traverse every children of callchain linearly during the
collapse/merge stage. Convert it to rbtree reduced the overhead
significantly.
On
From: Namhyung Kim namhyung@lge.com
Current collapse stage has a scalability problem which can be
reproduced easily with parallel kernel build. This is because it
needs to traverse every children of callchain linearly during the
collapse/merge stage. Convert it to rbtree reduced the
12 matches
Mail list logo
