On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 10:15:31AM -0000, danie...@apache.org wrote: > Author: danielsh > Date: Mon Jun 24 10:15:31 2013 > New Revision: 1495978 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1495978 > Log: > Silence a compiler warning. > > * subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/tree.c > (cache_lookup): Only declare FACTOR when it is used. > > Modified: > subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/tree.c > > Modified: subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/tree.c > URL: > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/tree.c?rev=1495978&r1=1495977&r2=1495978&view=diff > ============================================================================== > --- subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/tree.c (original) > +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/tree.c Mon Jun 24 10:15:31 2013 > @@ -342,8 +342,10 @@ cache_lookup( fs_fs_dag_cache_t *cache > apr_size_t path_len = strlen(path); > apr_uint32_t hash_value = (apr_uint32_t)revision; > > +#if SVN_UNALIGNED_ACCESS_IS_OK > /* "randomizing" / distributing factor used in our hash function */ > const apr_uint32_t factor = 0xd1f3da69; > +#endif >
Is this the right fix? Right now, the !SVN_UNALIGNED_ACCESS_IS_OK hash function is just (x[n] + 33^1 x[n-1] + ... + 33^(n-1) x[1] + 33^n x[0]). Daniel > /* optimistic lookup: hit the same bucket again? */ > cache_entry_t *result = &cache->buckets[cache->last_hit]; > >
