Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 10/16] dlm: use new hashtable implementation

From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers-vg+e7yoeK/dWk0Htik3J/[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 08:46:55 -0400

* Sasha Levin ([email-masked]) wrote:
[...]
> @@ -158,34 +159,21 @@ static int dlm_allow_conn;
>  static struct workqueue_struct *recv_workqueue;
>  static struct workqueue_struct *send_workqueue;
>  
> -static struct hlist_head connection_hash[CONN_HASH_SIZE];
> +static struct hlist_head connection_hash[CONN_HASH_BITS];
>  static DEFINE_MUTEX(connections_lock);
>  static struct kmem_cache *con_cache;
>  
>  static void process_recv_sockets(struct work_struct *work);
>  static void process_send_sockets(struct work_struct *work);
>  
> -
> -/* This is deliberately very simple because most clusters have simple
> -   sequential nodeids, so we should be able to go straight to a connection
> -   struct in the array */
> -static inline int nodeid_hash(int nodeid)
> -{
> -	return nodeid & (CONN_HASH_SIZE-1);
> -}

There is one thing I dislike about this change: you remove a useful
comment. It's good to be informed of the reason why a direct mapping
"value -> hash" without any dispersion function is preferred here.

Thanks,

Mathieu

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to [email-masked]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html