From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264579AbUEDSze (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 May 2004 14:55:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264582AbUEDSze (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 May 2004 14:55:34 -0400 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:10671 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264579AbUEDSzc (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 May 2004 14:55:32 -0400 Date: Tue, 4 May 2004 11:55:10 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: "Jose R. Santos" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, anton@samba.org, dheger@us.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] dentry and inode cache hash algorithm performance changes. Message-Id: <20040504115510.696184dc.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <20040504131223.GA28009@austin.ibm.com> References: <20040430191539.GC14271@rx8.ibm.com> <20040430131832.45be6956.akpm@osdl.org> <20040430205701.GG14271@rx8.ibm.com> <20040430213324.GK14271@rx8.ibm.com> <20040430150256.25735762.akpm@osdl.org> <20040504131223.GA28009@austin.ibm.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.7 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org "Jose R. Santos" wrote: > > * Andrew Morton [2004-04-30 15:02:56 -0700]: > > Also, I'd be interested in understanding what the input to the hashing > > functions looked like in this testing. It could be that the new hash just > > happens to work well with one particular test's dataset. Please convince > > us otherwise ;) > > Andrew - Is there any workload you want me to run to show that this hash > function is going to be equal or better that the one already provided > in Linux? Not really - it sounds like you've covered it pretty well. Did you try SDET? It could be that reducing the hash table size will turn pretty much any workload into a test of the hash quality.