2015-02-24 09:00, Yerden Zhumabekov: > > 23.02.2015 23:36, Thomas Monjalon ?????: > > 2015-02-19 15:21, Bruce Richardson: > >> Confirmed, this worked for me too. > >> Looking at the patches, they look good. However, one thing I think we are > >> missing > >> is a unit test to verify that all our CRC implementations give the same > >> result. > >> That would be useful as a sanity check of the software fallback > >> especially. The > >> existing hash tests, test the hash table implementation rather than the > >> mathematical argorithm used to compute the hash values. > >> > >> Overall, though, software fallback for CRC is something well worthwhile > >> having. > >> > >> Series Acked-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson at intel.com> > > Applied, thanks > > > > Note: running doxygen compilation helped me to find and fix a small > > mismatch (parameter alg was flag in comment). > > Thanks, Bruce, Thomas. > > As for yielding the same hash value, I made a test which runs every > CRC32 implementation across a number of randomly generated data sets. > Results are equal on my trial run. > > I can post a patch for test_hash.c a bit later if this kind of check > suffices.
Yes, seems interesting. Thanks
