Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > BTW, do you notice that the function is now modifying an object (the hash > table) even though this is rather unexpected from a "lookup" function? At the philosophical level, "lookup" ought to be operating on a "const" table. But at the implementation level, the table does not have to be "const" in the sense the implemenation language and data structure defines. I think this patch is a good example of that. I am kind of surprised that Jeff's attempt to do a full LRU made things worse, though. The only additional code compared to swap is a single memmove(): are we colliding too often (having to move a lot)? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html