[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180529181510.ttlmndxk36rmkwcy@gondor.apana.org.au>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2018 02:15:10 +0800
From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
To: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
tgraf@...g.ch, manfred@...orfullife.com,
guillaume.knispel@...ersonicimagine.com, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] lib/rhashtable: guarantee initial hashtable
allocation
On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 10:55:13AM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Wed, 30 May 2018, Herbert Xu wrote:
>
> > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 09:42:31AM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > >
> > > For the sake of simplicity, Linus suggested directly using HASH_MIN_SIZE
> > > such that we have a single fallback.
> >
> > Where did he suggest that?
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/5/24/1265
Well I think we should respect min_size. rhashtable users may
fail at insertion time if the table is too small.
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