On 2017/11/7 19:14, Fan Li wrote:
> We call scan_free_nid_bits only when there isn't many
> free nids left, it means that marked bits in free_nid_bitmap
> are supposed to be few, use find_next_bit_le is more
> efficient in such case.
> According to my tests, use find_next_bit_le instead of
>
On 2017/11/7 19:14, Fan Li wrote:
> We call scan_free_nid_bits only when there isn't many
> free nids left, it means that marked bits in free_nid_bitmap
> are supposed to be few, use find_next_bit_le is more
> efficient in such case.
> According to my tests, use find_next_bit_le instead of
>
We call scan_free_nid_bits only when there isn't many
free nids left, it means that marked bits in free_nid_bitmap
are supposed to be few, use find_next_bit_le is more
efficient in such case.
According to my tests, use find_next_bit_le instead of
test_bit_le will cut down the traversal time to one
We call scan_free_nid_bits only when there isn't many
free nids left, it means that marked bits in free_nid_bitmap
are supposed to be few, use find_next_bit_le is more
efficient in such case.
According to my tests, use find_next_bit_le instead of
test_bit_le will cut down the traversal time to one
4 matches
Mail list logo
