>Hmmm...I've talked about this a few times to Alan Cox and Stephen
>Tweedie. I didn't bother to instrument the hash function because in
>this case I knew it was tuned to the size of the inode structs. But, I
>did implement a variable sized page cache hash table array. I did this
Well it's strightforward. I just did the same some time ago for the buffer
hash table. But I agree with Chuck that enlarging the hash size could harm
the hash function distrubution (I should think about it some more though).
I also think that I'll implement the cookie thing suggested by Mark since
I am too much courious to see how much it will help (even if my mind is
driven by RB-trees ;).
Andrea Arcangeli
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/