From: Peter Barada <peter.barada@logicpd.com>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [Patch v2] Fix hash table deletion to prevent lost entries
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 19:05:20 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D87D9B0.1080102@logicpd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110321214823.EA538151A99@gemini.denx.de>
On 03/21/2011 05:48 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Peter Barada,
>
> In message <4D385A7F.2070803@logicpd.com> you wrote:
>> On 01/19/2011 03:47 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>>> Dear Peter Barada,
>>>
>>> In message <4D371208.3090801@logicpd.com> you wrote:
>>>>>> The hash delete code is in error; instead of just removing the deleted
>>>>>> key, it should instead allocate a new hashtable, hash all the keys into
>>>>>> the new table except for the deleted key and then reclaim the old table
>>>>>> (and deleted key).
>>>>> Can you please come up with a patch?
>> From: Peter Barada <peter.barada@logicpd.com>
>> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:38:57 -0500
>> Subject: [PATCH] Fix hashtable to properly handle deletion.
>>
>> Use negative used value to mark deleted entry. Search keeps probing past
>> deleted entries. Adding an entry uses first deleted entry when it hits
>> end of probe chain.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Peter Barada <peter.barada@logicpd.com>
> Checkpatch generates a number of errors:
>
> [PATCH] Fix hashtable to properly handle deletion.
> total: 8 errors, 16 warnings, 66 lines checked
>
> Can you please fix these, and resubmit?
Updated patch attached (Thunderbird munched tabs)...
> Also, do you happen to have a test case that can be used show the
> problem in the existing code, and to test the patch?
No, I don't have a testcase off hand (IIRC hashtable size is dependent on size of u-boot and amount of RAM), from my original email:
In message <4D34C85E.4030408@logicpd.com> you wrote:
> >
> > After spending an entire day digging into the hash using GDB/BDI on my
> > ARM board, I've findally figured out that the hash key of "ramdiskimage"
> > and "preboot" are the same modulus 347, and this is problematic because
> > on the initial hash import, preboot is placed into the hash first (at
> > idx 190 since the table is sorted), and then ramdiskimage collides with
> > preboot causing the 2nd probe (at idx 191) to occur which works fine.
> > Unfortunately as part of the housecleaning, preboot is deleted and the
> > environemnt saved. The delete of preboot removes entry at idx 190 and
> > the next lookup of ramdiskimage sees that idx 190 is empty and believes
> > that the ramdiskimage is not in the table ionstead of rehashing to find
> > it at idx 191.
Hope this helps...
--
Peter Barada
peter.barada at logicpd.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: u-boot-hashtable.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 2901 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20110321/6df2f23f/attachment.bin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-21 23:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-01-17 22:53 [U-Boot] Hash problem Peter Barada
2011-01-19 8:32 ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-01-19 16:32 ` [U-Boot] [Patch] Fix hash table deletion to prevent lost entries Peter Barada
2011-01-19 20:47 ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-01-20 15:53 ` [U-Boot] [Patch v2] " Peter Barada
2011-03-21 21:48 ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-03-21 23:05 ` Peter Barada [this message]
2011-03-22 21:45 ` Wolfgang Denk
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=4D87D9B0.1080102@logicpd.com \
--to=peter.barada@logicpd.com \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/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