in theory that's true. however, i also tried a pair of 10 (or 12) bit
random tables x-ored together without shifting, and the result wasn't much
better. i think you can get away with this if your input data allows it.
but again, using small random tables is to be desired. can you think of a
way to make a random table-driven hash function work with an absolute
minimum amount of memory references?
- Chuck Lever
-- corporate: <chuckl@netscape.com> personal: <chucklever@netscape.net> or <cel@monkey.org>The Linux Scalability project: http://www.citi.umich.edu/projects/citi-netscape/
- 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/