On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:13:43AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > * Linus Torvalds (torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 5:42 AM, Mathieu Desnoyers > > <mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > So defining e.g.: > > > > > > #include <linux/log2.h> > > > > > > #define DFR_HASH_BITS (PAGE_SHIFT - ilog2(BITS_PER_LONG)) > > > > > > would keep the intended behavior in all cases: use one page for the hash > > > array. > > > > Well, since that wasn't true before either because of the long-time > > bug you point out, clearly the page size isn't all that important. I > > think it's more important to have small and simple code, and "9" is > > certainly that, compared to playing ilog2 games with not-so-obvious > > things. > > > > Because there's no reason to believe that '9' is in any way a worse > > random number than something page-shift-related, is there? And getting > > away from *previous* overly-complicated size calculations that had > > been broken because they were too complicated and random, sounds like > > a good idea. > > Good point. I agree that unless we really care about the precise number > of TLB entries and cache lines used by this hash table, we might want to > stay away from page-size and pointer-size based calculation. > > It might not hurt to explain this in the patch changelog though. I'd also be happy to take that as a separate patch now. --b. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>