lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Aug]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC 1/4] hashtable: introduce a small and naive hashtable
On 08/02/2012 12:45 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 12:41:56AM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> How would your DEFINE_HASHTABLE look like if we got for the simple
>> 'struct hash_table' approach?
>
> I think defining a different enclosing anonymous struct which the
> requested number of array entries and then aliasing the actual
> hash_table to that symbol should work. It's rather horrible and I'm
> not sure it's worth the trouble.

I agree that this is probably not worth the trouble.

At the moment I see two alternatives:

1. Dynamically allocate the hash buckets.

2. Use the first bucket to store size. Something like the follows:

#define HASH_TABLE(name, bits) \
struct hlist_head name[1 << bits + 1];

#define HASH_TABLE_INIT (bits) ({name[0].next = bits});

And then have hash_{add,get} just skip the first bucket.


While it's not a pretty hack, I don't see a nice way to avoid having to dynamically allocate buckets for all cases.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-08-02 12:41    [W:0.162 / U:0.200 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site