4 Jun
2007
4 Jun
'07
2:07 p.m.
On Sun, 2007-06-03 at 18:27 +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote:
..Or maybe just fix the basic timeout_*() API. Add a new timeout_reset() call == timeout_remove() + timeout_add(original values) and then make the implementation be fast with hundreds of timeouts. The timeouts are currently kept in linked list, so that could be changed to red-black tree I guess (sorted by next execution time). Or is there a better data structure for this?
Maybe check what the kernel does? It has the runqueue and that afaik.
johannes