From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753278AbbDASzd (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Apr 2015 14:55:33 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:33982 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753085AbbDASza (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Apr 2015 14:55:30 -0400 Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2015 20:46:25 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Waiman Long Cc: Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Shuah Khan , Scott J Norton , Douglas Hatch Subject: Re: [PATCH] lfsr: a simple binary Galois linear feedback shift register Message-ID: <20150401184625.GA9447@dyad.arnhem.chello.nl> References: <1427822889-8783-1-git-send-email-Waiman.Long@hp.com> <20150401075325.GV27490@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> <551BFD9F.2030403@hp.com> <20150401164632.GN23123@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150401164632.GN23123@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 06:46:32PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > Since it is used in conjunction with hashing, it is possible that hashing > > can produce a value of 0. Do we really want to have a warning for that? > > Alternatively, we can pass in some flag to decide if a warning should be > > issued. > > So if we present it as generic code we cannot assume what it'll be used > for. The only thing we know is that it should never be 0, so warn for it > and let the user deal with it. Also while i like the lfsr probe i feel we should listen to my wiser self and go with a simpler linear probe first. Only of we find prpblems with that should we look into different things.