On Thu, 27 Mar 2014, bradley.d.vol...@intel.com wrote:
From: Brad Volkin bradley.d.vol...@intel.com
As suggested during review, this makes it much more obvious
when the tables are not sorted.
Let's look at the optimizations later.
Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula jani.nik...@intel.com
Cc: Jani
On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 12:11:37PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
On Thu, 27 Mar 2014, bradley.d.vol...@intel.com wrote:
From: Brad Volkin bradley.d.vol...@intel.com
As suggested during review, this makes it much more obvious
when the tables are not sorted.
Let's look at the optimizations
On 03/27/2014 11:43 AM, bradley.d.vol...@intel.com wrote:
From: Brad Volkin bradley.d.vol...@intel.com
As suggested during review, this makes it much more obvious
when the tables are not sorted.
Cc: Jani Nikula jani.nik...@linux.intel.com
Signed-off-by: Brad Volkin
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 02:47:03PM -0700, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
Does any code actually rely on the tables being sorted?
Not today. The idea was to make it easier to move to an algorithm that does
in the future. For example, I thought binary search might be an easy win.
I didn't see any
