linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH RFC 1/5] scripts: Add sortextable to sort the kernel's except

To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/5] scripts: Add sortextable to sort the kernel's exception table.
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@kernel.org>
Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2011 15:30:59 -0800
Cc: David Daney <ddaney.cavm@gmail.com>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, ralf@linux-mips.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-embedded@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, David Daney <david.daney@cavium.com>
In-reply-to: <1321831713.15493.87.camel@shinybook.infradead.org>
Organization: Linux Kernel Organization, Inc.
References: <1321645068-20475-1-git-send-email-ddaney.cavm@gmail.com> <1321645068-20475-2-git-send-email-ddaney.cavm@gmail.com> <4EC98C97.50604@kernel.org> <1321831713.15493.87.camel@shinybook.infradead.org>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110930 Thunderbird/7.0.1
On 11/20/2011 03:28 PM, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-11-20 at 15:26 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> If we're going to do this at build time, I would suggest using a
>> collisionless hash instead.  The lookup time for those are O(1), but
>> they definitely need to be done at build time. 
> 
> Is the lookup time really an issue?
> 

Probably not a big one (in most scenarios), but with better exception
handling it might stretch the usability of exceptions.  The bigger thing
is that once you're doing a build-time special handler for this
*anyway*, you might as well drive the cost of the lookup to functionally
zero.

        -hpa

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>