linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v6] hashtable: introduce a small and naive hashtable

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <AE90C24D6B3A694183C094C60CF0A2F6026B7009@saturn3.aculab.com>
Date:	Thu, 27 Sep 2012 09:25:25 +0100
From:	"David Laight" <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:	"Mathieu Desnoyers" <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	"Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	"Sasha Levin" <levinsasha928@...il.com>,
	<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, <tj@...nel.org>,
	<akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<ebiederm@...ssion.com>, <neilb@...e.de>, <bfields@...ldses.org>,
	<ejt@...hat.com>, <snitzer@...hat.com>, <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	<josh@...htriplett.org>, <rmallon@...il.com>, <palves@...hat.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v6] hashtable: introduce a small and naive hashtable

> > > And even then, if we would do:
> > >
> > >  	for (i = 0; i < HASH_SIZE(hashtable); i++)
> > >  		if (!hlist_empty(&hashtable[i]))
> > >  			break;
> > >
> > >  	return i >= HASH_SIZE(hashtable);
> > >
> > > What happens if the last entry of the table is non-empty ?
> >
> > It still works, as 'i' is not incremented due to the break. And i will
> > still be less than HASH_SIZE(hashtable). Did you have *your* cup of
> > coffee today? ;-)
> 
> Ahh, right! Actually I had it already ;-)

I tend to dislike the repeated test, gcc might be able to optimise
it away, but the code is cleaner written as:

	for (i = 0; i < HASH_SIZE(hashtable); i++)
		if (!hlist_empty(&hashtable[i]))
			return false;
	return true;

> Agreed that the flags should be removed. Moving to define + static
> inline is still important though.

Not sure I'd bother making the function inline.

	David



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/