Re: [PATCH v6] hashtable: introduce a small and naive hashtable

[Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>]

* David Laight (David.Laight@ACULAB.COM) wrote:
> Amazing how something simple gets lots of comments and versions :-)
> 
> > ...
> > + * This has to be a macro since HASH_BITS() will not work on pointers since
> > + * it calculates the size during preprocessing.
> > + */
> > +#define hash_empty(hashtable)							\
> > +({										\
> > +	int __i;								\
> > +	bool __ret = true;							\
> > +										\
> > +	for (__i = 0; __i < HASH_SIZE(hashtable); __i++)			\
> > +		if (!hlist_empty(&hashtable[__i]))				\
> > +			__ret = false;						\
> > +										\
> > +	__ret;									\
> > +})
> 
> Actually you could have a #define that calls a function
> passing in the address and size.
> Also, should the loop have a 'break' in it?

+1   Removing unnecessary variables defined within a
statement-expression is indeed something we want, and your suggestion of
a macro calling a static inline is, IMHO, spot-on.

The same should be done for hash_init().

And yes, a break would be welcome in that loop: no need to continue if
we encounter a non-empty hlist.

Thanks,

Mathieu

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com