On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 13:37 -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 13:36 -0500, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 13:27 -0500, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 12:58 -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2012-01-03 at 18:00 -0500, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > > > >From [PATCH 0/0] A shared memory cache to perform better:
> > > >
> > > > 0/3: New utility functions/headers
> > > > These are also quite straightforward but they are useless without
the
> > > > later patches
> > >
> > > Nack.
> > >
> > > Your implementation doesn't match the original:
> > >
> > >
> > > From MurmurHash3_x86_32():
> > > h1 = h1*5+0xe6546b64;
> > >
> > > From this patch:
> > > h1 = h1 + 5 + 0xe6546b64;
> > >
> > > I can only assume that s/*/+ is not going to yield proper results :)
> >
> > OUPS, well it will give *different* results, but consistent.
> > Anyway I'll fix it and send back a fixed patch.
> >
> > >
> > > I fail to understand why you use (nblocks * 4) instead of 'len',
given
> > > that nblocks was defined as len/4
> >
> > Because (nblocks * 4) != len and it is 3 times out 4 < len :-)
> > Remember nblocks is an integer, so any fractional part is lost, which is
> > what we want here, we want to process len - (nblocks * 4) remaining
> > bytes.
> >
> > > While I know that it's a fixed value, I'd rather see
sizeof(uint32_t)
> > > instead of '4' in getblock() (for readability and clarity)
> >
> > Ok.
>
> Attached a patch with the requested code changes addressed.
I think you resent the old patch
I think you are right.
Let's try again.
Simo.
--
Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York