Re: hashed waitqueues

From: William Lee Irwin III (wli@holomorphy.com)
Date: Wed Jan 16 2002 - 12:42:26 EST


On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 02:21:41PM +0000, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Looking up "good hash function" on Google leads to these notable pages:
        [various URL's]
> The last one is interesting because it mentions the golden prime
> multiplier function, and suggests good non-multipler functions instead.
> (Justification: the multiplier function doesn't distribute bits evenly).

Excellent! I can always use more of these to test.

It seems odd that they don't like Fibonacci hashing, it appears to pass
various chi^2 tests on bucket distribution. And operator-sparse Fibonacci
hashing primes appear to pass it as well, at least once 10 terms of the
continued fraction match (operator-sparse Fibonacci hashing primes means
that the multiplication can be done with shifts and adds or subtracts).

Regardless, various arches want non-multiplicative hash functions and
they'll be getting them. These hash functions will certainly prove
useful in getting a broader base to test against. I don't care to have
a "pet" hash function, only one that is good as possible.

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



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jan 23 2002 - 21:00:16 EST