Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 8/9] rbtree: faster augmented rbtree manipulation | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Date | Mon, 06 Aug 2012 16:17:49 +0200 |
| |
On Thu, 2012-08-02 at 15:34 -0700, Michel Lespinasse wrote: > +static void augment_propagate(struct rb_node *rb, struct rb_node *stop) > +{ > + while (rb != stop) { > + struct interval_tree_node *node = > + rb_entry(rb, struct interval_tree_node, rb); > + unsigned long subtree_last = compute_subtree_last(node); > + if (node->__subtree_last == subtree_last) > + break; > + node->__subtree_last = subtree_last; > + rb = rb_parent(&node->rb); > + } > +} > + > +static void augment_copy(struct rb_node *rb_old, struct rb_node *rb_new) > +{ > + struct interval_tree_node *old = > + rb_entry(rb_old, struct interval_tree_node, rb); > + struct interval_tree_node *new = > + rb_entry(rb_new, struct interval_tree_node, rb); > + > + new->__subtree_last = old->__subtree_last; > +} > + > +static void augment_rotate(struct rb_node *rb_old, struct rb_node *rb_new) > +{ > + struct interval_tree_node *old = > + rb_entry(rb_old, struct interval_tree_node, rb); > + struct interval_tree_node *new = > + rb_entry(rb_new, struct interval_tree_node, rb); > + > + new->__subtree_last = old->__subtree_last; > + old->__subtree_last = compute_subtree_last(old); > +}
I still don't get why we need the 3 callbacks when both propagate and rotate are simple variants of the original callback (compute_subtree_last, in this instance).
Why would every user need to replicate the propagate and rotate boilerplate?
| |