[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4AE64F72.6060802@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 02:40:02 +0100
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC: opurdila@...acom.com, krkumar2@...ibm.com, hagen@...u.net,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH next-next-2.6] netdev: better dev_name_hash
David Miller a écrit :
> From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 15:55:10 +0100
>
>> But should we really care ?
>
> The only thing I see consistently in this thread is that
> jhash performs consistently well and without any tweaking.
>
> And without any assumptions about the characteristics of
> the device names. I've seen everything from the traditional
> "eth%d" to things like "davem_is_a_prick%d" so you really cannot
> optimize for anything in particular.
>
> Jenkins is ~50 cycles per round of 4 bytes last time I checked, give
> or take, and that was on crappy sparc. :-) So the execution cost is
> really not that bad, contrary to what I've seen claimed as an argument
> against using jhash here.
>
> And if I-cache footprint is really an issue, we can have one
> out-of-line expansion of jhash somewhere under lib/ since we use jhash
> in so many places these days.
Well, since Stephen posted a generic patch on lkml, I suspect we'll take
the dcache hash anyway ?
But yes, last time I checked, jhash was pretty big, so an out-of-line
version is welcome :)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists