From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: Question about tcp hash function tcp_hashfn() Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 23:18:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20060531.231839.10909081.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20060531130615.GA32362@2ka.mipt.ru> <20060531122955.B10147@openss7.org> <20060601061234.GB28087@2ka.mipt.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: draghuram@rocketmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, bidulock@openss7.org Return-path: Received: from dsl027-180-168.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net ([216.27.180.168]:20151 "EHLO sunset.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751810AbWFAGSH (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Jun 2006 02:18:07 -0400 To: johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru In-Reply-To: <20060601061234.GB28087@2ka.mipt.ru> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org From: Evgeniy Polyakov Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 10:12:36 +0400 > I've present the new simple code and test results which show > that folded and not folded Jenkins hashes _do_ produce _exactly_ the > same distribution. Ok I believe you now :) > I think I've already said that fairly distributed values being xored > produce still fairly distributed value, so parts of 32bit fairly > distributed hash after being xored with each other still produce fairly > distributed 32bit space. It would make a good research paper for someone mathmatically inclined enough :)