Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86: get more exact nr_irqs

From: Yinghai Lu <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2010 11:47:07 -0800

On 01/04/2010 11:30 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 01/04/2010 11:16 AM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>
>> If we care about memory use efficiency let's replace irq_desc_ptrs
>> with a rbtree or a radix_tree.  Something that moves the memory use
>> penalty onto those machines that have a lot of irqs.
>>
> 
> rbtree doesn't make much sense for something that is addressed by index,
> and doesn't need to answer questions of the form "give me the highest
> member <= X".  A hash table or radix tree makes sense, depending on the
> expected sparseness of the index.

will check if we can use radix with it like powerpc

YH