On Sun, 2009-04-12 at 01:01 -0700, David Miller wrote: > > That's a 3 bit hash. The risk of collisions is very high. I would > > understand if you had 8 entries for the hash values, but the hash values > > themselves should be reasonably unique. > > In my testing there weren't many collisions. > > I think fixing disk cache corruption is more important than > arguing over the distribution properties of the hash function > I have choosen. > > Right?
It's not just about distribution properties. My impression is that your code misuses hashes as indices in a table. Let's make the hash 32-bit. That would make it harder to misuse. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
