From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: George Spelvin <linux@horizon.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org, bfields@fieldses.org,
eric.dumazet@gmail.com, jlayton@poochiereds.net,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, riel@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] <linux/hash.h>: Make hash_64(), hash_ptr() return 32 bits
Date: Mon, 2 May 2016 15:28:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160502132804.GF12845@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160502102016.17936.qmail@ns.horizon.com>
On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 06:20:16AM -0400, George Spelvin wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH 1/2] <linux/hash.h>: Make hash_64(), hash_ptr() return 32 bits
> +static __always_inline u64 hash_64(u64 val, unsigned bits)
> +{
> /* High bits are more random, so use them. */
> + return __hash_64(val) >> (64 - bits);
> }
Is the subject stale or the above a mistake? Because hash_64() still
very much seems to return u64.
Also, I think I would prefer to keep it like this, I would like to use
it for kernel/locking/lockdep.c:iterate_chain_key(), which currently is
a somewhat crap hash.
Something like:
static inline u64 iterate_chain_key(u64 key1, u64 key2)
{
return hash_64(key1 ^ key2, 64);
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-05-02 13:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CA+55aFxBWfAHQNAdBbdVr+z8ror4GVteyce3D3=vwDWxhu5KqQ@mail.gmail.com>
2016-04-30 20:52 ` [patch 2/7] lib/hashmod: Add modulo based hash mechanism George Spelvin
2016-05-01 8:35 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-05-01 9:43 ` George Spelvin
2016-05-01 16:51 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-05-14 3:54 ` George Spelvin
2016-05-14 18:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-05-02 7:11 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-05-02 10:20 ` [PATCH 1/2] <linux/hash.h>: Make hash_64(), hash_ptr() return 32 bits George Spelvin
2016-05-02 10:22 ` [PATCH 2/2] <linux/hash.h>: Fix hash_64()'s horrible collision problem George Spelvin
2016-05-02 20:08 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-05-02 10:27 ` [RFC PATCH 3/2] (Rant) Fix various hash abuses George Spelvin
2016-05-02 10:31 ` [RFC PATCH 4/2] namei: Improve hash mixing if CONFIG_DCACHE_WORD_ACCESS George Spelvin
2016-05-16 18:51 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-05-02 13:28 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2016-05-02 19:08 ` [PATCH 1/2] <linux/hash.h>: Make hash_64(), hash_ptr() return 32 bits George Spelvin
2016-05-02 16:24 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-05-02 20:26 ` George Spelvin
2016-05-02 21:19 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-05-02 21:41 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-05-03 1:59 ` George Spelvin
2016-05-03 3:01 ` Linus Torvalds
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160502132804.GF12845@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=jlayton@poochiereds.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@horizon.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox