The naming is following the existing CRC32 hash: https://elixir.bootlin.com/dpdk/v22.11.1/source/lib/hash/rte_hash_crc.h#L168. I believe all existing hash functions in DPDK are 32 bits, so "32" didn't appear in other hash function names. If we add "32" here, we probably should also rename rte_hash_crc(). I'm fine with either option.
On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 5:49 AM Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> wrote: > 15/02/2023 12:06, Bili Dong: > > An XOR32 hash is needed in the Software Switch (SWX) Pipeline for its > > use case in P4. We implement it in this patch so it could be easily > > registered in the pipeline later. > > > > Signed-off-by: Bili Dong <qobili...@gmail.com> > > --- > > +/** > > + * Calculate XOR32 hash on user-supplied byte array. > > + * > > + * @param data > > + * Data to perform hash on. > > + * @param data_len > > + * How many bytes to use to calculate hash value. > > + * @param init_val > > + * Value to initialise hash generator. > > + * @return > > + * 32bit calculated hash value. > > + */ > > +static inline uint32_t > > +rte_hash_xor(const void *data, uint32_t data_len, uint32_t init_val) > > Should we add "32" in the function name? > > >
