Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Mon, 21 Aug 2023 14:43:36 +0530 | From | Dhruva Gole <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: stats: Improve the performance of cpufreq_stats_create_table() |
| |
On Aug 18, 2023 at 09:50:00 +0000, Liao Chang wrote: > In the worst case, the freq_table of policy data is not sorted and > contains duplicate frequencies, this means that it needs to iterate > through the entire freq_table of policy to ensure each frequency is > unique in the freq_table of stats data, this has a time complexity of > O(N^2), where N is the number of frequencies in the freq_table of > policy. > > However, if the policy.freq_table is already sorted and contains no > duplicate frequencices, it can reduce the time complexity of creating
s/frequencices/frequencies?
> stats.freq_table to O(N), the 'freq_table_sorted' field of policy data > can be used to indicate whether the policy.freq_table is sorted. > > Signed-off-by: Liao Chang <liaochang1@huawei.com> > --- > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_stats.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_stats.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_stats.c > index 55c7ffd37d1c..fcb74050711a 100644 > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_stats.c > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_stats.c > @@ -243,7 +243,8 @@ void cpufreq_stats_create_table(struct cpufreq_policy *policy) > > /* Find valid-unique entries */ > cpufreq_for_each_valid_entry(pos, policy->freq_table) > - if (freq_table_get_index(stats, pos->frequency) == -1) > + if ((policy->freq_table_sorted != CPUFREQ_TABLE_UNSORTED) ||
[...]
Otherwise looks okay to me,
Reviewed-by: Dhruva Gole <d-gole@ti.com>
-- Best regards, Dhruva Gole <d-gole@ti.com>
| |