On Fri, Dec 06, 2002 at 08:37:26AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, Miles Bader wrote:
> >
> > If the bits parameter of hash_long (in <linux/hash.h>) is 0, then it
> > ends up right-shifting by BITS_PER_LONG, which is undefined in C (and
> > often is a nop).
>
> I would much rather just add a comment saying that "bits" had better be in
> a valid range. There are no valid uses for a 0-bit hash table that I can
> see, and undefined behaviour for undefined operations is fine with me.
Wouldn't it be nice to have a memory-for-speed tradeoff by being able
to set the bits-in-the-hash-table to zero?
Roger.
-- ** R.E.Wolff@BitWizard.nl ** http://www.BitWizard.nl/ ** +31-15-2600998 ** *-- BitWizard writes Linux device drivers for any device you may have! --* * The Worlds Ecosystem is a stable system. Stable systems may experience * * excursions from the stable situation. We are currently in such an * * excursion: The stable situation does not include humans. *************** - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 15 2002 - 22:00:13 EST