[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160402014653.GA19235@gondor.apana.org.au>
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2016 09:46:53 +0800
From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Cc: Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, tgraf@...g.ch
Subject: Re: Question on rhashtable in worst-case scenario.
On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 11:34:10PM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
>
> I was thinking about that one - it's not obvious to me from the code
> how this "explicitly checking for dups" would be done or let's say how
> rhashtable differentiates. But since it seems to work for Ben until
> hitting a certain number of identical keys, surely that's just me not
> understanding the code rather than anything else :)
It's really simple, rhashtable_insert_fast does not check for dups
while rhashtable_lookup_insert_* do.
Cheers,
--
Email: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
Powered by blists - more mailing lists