From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rusty Russell Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] New jhash function Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 07:53:45 +1030 Message-ID: <201012090753.46050.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> References: <201011271401.22773.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> <1291379941-31565-1-git-send-email-kadlec@blackhole.kfki.hu> <20101208.090954.115924303.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kadlec@blackhole.kfki.hu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@osdl.org To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from ozlabs.org ([203.10.76.45]:58804 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756158Ab0LHVXv (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Dec 2010 16:23:51 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20101208.090954.115924303.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 9 Dec 2010 03:39:54 am David Miller wrote: > From: Jozsef Kadlecsik > Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2010 13:38:59 +0100 > > > The current jhash.h implements the lookup2() hash function by Bob Jenkins. > > However, lookup2() is outdated as Bob wrote a new hash function called > > lookup3(). There is a longer comparison of those two and other hash > > functions at http://burtleburtle.net/bob/hash/doobs.html. > > > > Please consider applying the following patches. > > Patch #1 is already in the net-next-2.6 tree, and as long as there are > no major objections to the general crowd (including Rusty et al.) I am > happy to put patch #2 into my tree as well. > > Rusty, does the current version of patch #2 look good to you? Yes, 2/2 good. Thanks Jozsef! Acked-by: Rusty Russell