[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH v3 01/17] hashtable: introduce a small and naive hashtable
- From: Tejun Heo <tj kernel org>
- To: Sasha Levin <levinsasha928 gmail com>
- Cc: snitzer redhat com, fweisbec gmail com, Trond Myklebust netapp com, bfields fieldses org, paul gortmaker windriver com, dm-devel redhat com, agk redhat com, aarcange redhat com, rds-devel oss oracle com, eric dumazet gmail com, venkat x venkatsubra oracle com, ccaulfie redhat com, mingo elte hu, dev openvswitch org, jesse nicira com, josh joshtriplett org, rostedt goodmis org, mathieu desnoyers efficios com, axboe kernel dk, linux-nfs vger kernel org, edumazet google com, linux-mm kvack org, netdev vger kernel org, linux-kernel vger kernel org, ejt redhat com, ebiederm xmission com, lw cn fujitsu com, teigland redhat com, akpm linux-foundation org, torvalds linux-foundation org, davem davemloft net
- Subject: Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH v3 01/17] hashtable: introduce a small and naive hashtable
- Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 16:07:40 -0700
Hello,
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 12:59:25AM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
> Thats the thing, the amount of things of things you can do with a given bucket
> is very limited. You can't add entries to any point besides the head (without
> walking the entire list).
Kinda my point. We already have all the hlist*() interface to deal
with such cases. Having something which is evidently the trivial
hlist hashtable and advertises as such in the interface can be
helpful. I think we need that more than we need anything fancy.
Heh, this is a debate about which one is less insignificant. I can
see your point. I'd really like to hear what others think on this.
Guys, do we want something which is evidently trivial hlist hashtable
which can use hlist_*() API directly or do we want something better
encapsulated?
Thanks.
--
tejun
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]