Re: [PATCH RFC 1/4] lib/radix: add universal radix_tree_fill_range

[Dan Williams]

On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 7:57 AM, Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I'm not at all against the idea of having a tree which supports ranges, except that we already have one; the interval tree.  Did you investigate using the interval tree for your use case?

I am continuing to investigate, but that is orthogonal to whether
Konstantin's changes are an improvement for the radix implementation.
Hmm, would we have ended up with two data-structures if a range-based
radix was available?

The benefits I see is that it simplifies insertion as it no longer
needs to explicitly manage the order of the entries, and, iiuc, let's
the user skip the sibling-to-head conversion when it is not needed
which simplifies lookups.