+17
−13
+1
−1
+2
−2
+3
−3
+3
−2
Loading
Gitlab 现已全面支持 git over ssh 与 git over https。通过 HTTPS 访问请配置带有 read_repository / write_repository 权限的 Personal access token。通过 SSH 端口访问请使用 22 端口或 13389 端口。如果使用CAS注册了账户但不知道密码,可以自行至设置中更改;如有其他问题,请发邮件至 service@cra.moe 寻求协助。
rb_first_cached() trades an extra pointer "leftmost" for doing the same
job as rb_first() but in O(1).
Functions manipulating href_root need to get the first entry, this
converts href_root to use rb_first_cached().
This patch is first in the sequenct of similar updates to other rbtrees
and this is analysis of the expected behaviour and improvements.
There's a common pattern:
while (node = rb_first) {
entry = rb_entry(node)
next = rb_next(node)
rb_erase(node)
cleanup(entry)
}
rb_first needs to traverse the tree up to logN depth, rb_erase can
completely reshuffle the tree. With the caching we'll skip the traversal
in rb_first. That's a cached memory access vs looped pointer
dereference trade-off that IMHO has a clear winner.
Measurements show there's not much difference in a sample tree with
10000 nodes: 4.5s / rb_first and 4.8s / rb_first_cached. Real effects of
caching and pointer chasing are unpredictable though.
Further optimzations can be done to avoid the expensive rb_erase step.
In some cases it's ok to process the nodes in any order, so the tree can
be traversed in post-order, not rebalancing the children nodes and just
calling free. Care must be taken regarding the next node.
Tested-by:
Holger Hoffstätte <holger@applied-asynchrony.com>
Signed-off-by:
Liu Bo <bo.liu@linux.alibaba.com>
Reviewed-by:
David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
[ update changelog from mail discussions ]
Signed-off-by:
David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
CRA Git | Maintained and supported by SUSTech CRA and CCSE