02 Nov, 2017
1 commit
-
Many source files in the tree are missing licensing information, which
makes it harder for compliance tools to determine the correct license.By default all files without license information are under the default
license of the kernel, which is GPL version 2.Update the files which contain no license information with the 'GPL-2.0'
SPDX license identifier. The SPDX identifier is a legally binding
shorthand, which can be used instead of the full boiler plate text.This patch is based on work done by Thomas Gleixner and Kate Stewart and
Philippe Ombredanne.How this work was done:
Patches were generated and checked against linux-4.14-rc6 for a subset of
the use cases:
- file had no licensing information it it.
- file was a */uapi/* one with no licensing information in it,
- file was a */uapi/* one with existing licensing information,Further patches will be generated in subsequent months to fix up cases
where non-standard license headers were used, and references to license
had to be inferred by heuristics based on keywords.The analysis to determine which SPDX License Identifier to be applied to
a file was done in a spreadsheet of side by side results from of the
output of two independent scanners (ScanCode & Windriver) producing SPDX
tag:value files created by Philippe Ombredanne. Philippe prepared the
base worksheet, and did an initial spot review of a few 1000 files.The 4.13 kernel was the starting point of the analysis with 60,537 files
assessed. Kate Stewart did a file by file comparison of the scanner
results in the spreadsheet to determine which SPDX license identifier(s)
to be applied to the file. She confirmed any determination that was not
immediately clear with lawyers working with the Linux Foundation.Criteria used to select files for SPDX license identifier tagging was:
- Files considered eligible had to be source code files.
- Make and config files were included as candidates if they contained >5
lines of source
- File already had some variant of a license header in it (even if
Reviewed-by: Philippe Ombredanne
Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman
09 Sep, 2017
1 commit
-
Allow interval trees to quickly check for overlaps to avoid unnecesary
tree lookups in interval_tree_iter_first().As of this patch, all interval tree flavors will require using a
'rb_root_cached' such that we can have the leftmost node easily
available. While most users will make use of this feature, those with
special functions (in addition to the generic insert, delete, search
calls) will avoid using the cached option as they can do funky things
with insertions -- for example, vma_interval_tree_insert_after().[jglisse@redhat.com: fix deadlock from typo vm_lock_anon_vma()]
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170808225719.20723-1-jglisse@redhat.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170719014603.19029-12-dave@stgolabs.net
Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso
Signed-off-by: Jérôme Glisse
Acked-by: Christian König
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel)
Acked-by: Doug Ledford
Acked-by: Michael S. Tsirkin
Cc: David Airlie
Cc: Jason Wang
Cc: Christian Benvenuti
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds
09 Oct, 2012
1 commit
-
Patch 1 implements support for interval trees, on top of the augmented
rbtree API. It also adds synthetic tests to compare the performance of
interval trees vs prio trees. Short answers is that interval trees are
slightly faster (~25%) on insert/erase, and much faster (~2.4 - 3x)
on search. It is debatable how realistic the synthetic test is, and I have
not made such measurements yet, but my impression is that interval trees
would still come out faster.Patch 2 uses a preprocessor template to make the interval tree generic,
and uses it as a replacement for the vma prio_tree.Patch 3 takes the other prio_tree user, kmemleak, and converts it to use
a basic rbtree. We don't actually need the augmented rbtree support here
because the intervals are always non-overlapping.Patch 4 removes the now-unused prio tree library.
Patch 5 proposes an additional optimization to rb_erase_augmented, now
providing it as an inline function so that the augmented callbacks can be
inlined in. This provides an additional 5-10% performance improvement
for the interval tree insert/erase benchmark. There is a maintainance cost
as it exposes augmented rbtree users to some of the rbtree library internals;
however I think this cost shouldn't be too high as I expect the augmented
rbtree will always have much less users than the base rbtree.I should probably add a quick summary of why I think it makes sense to
replace prio trees with augmented rbtree based interval trees now. One of
the drivers is that we need augmented rbtrees for Rik's vma gap finding
code, and once you have them, it just makes sense to use them for interval
trees as well, as this is the simpler and more well known algorithm. prio
trees, in comparison, seem *too* clever: they impose an additional 'heap'
constraint on the tree, which they use to guarantee a faster worst-case
complexity of O(k+log N) for stabbing queries in a well-balanced prio
tree, vs O(k*log N) for interval trees (where k=number of matches,
N=number of intervals). Now this sounds great, but in practice prio trees
don't realize this theorical benefit. First, the additional constraint
makes them harder to update, so that the kernel implementation has to
simplify things by balancing them like a radix tree, which is not always
ideal. Second, the fact that there are both index and heap properties
makes both tree manipulation and search more complex, which results in a
higher multiplicative time constant. As it turns out, the simple interval
tree algorithm ends up running faster than the more clever prio tree.This patch:
Add two test modules:
- prio_tree_test measures the performance of lib/prio_tree.c, both for
insertion/removal and for stabbing searches- interval_tree_test measures the performance of a library of equivalent
functionality, built using the augmented rbtree support.In order to support the second test module, lib/interval_tree.c is
introduced. It is kept separate from the interval_tree_test main file
for two reasons: first we don't want to provide an unfair advantage
over prio_tree_test by having everything in a single compilation unit,
and second there is the possibility that the interval tree functionality
could get some non-test users in kernel over time.Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse
Cc: Rik van Riel
Cc: Hillf Danton
Cc: Peter Zijlstra
Cc: Catalin Marinas
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli
Cc: David Woodhouse
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds
