Linus Torvalds writes: (Summary) wrote:
So I *think* that this was on purpose, but it's a long time ago, and we've changed some of the hashing since.
we've changed some of the hashing since.
And I think you're wrong that it's a no-op on 32-bit. It's a very expensive and pointless multiplication there too, even if the *shift* ends up being a nop-op.
ends up being a nop-op.
The name hashing is pretty performance-sensitive.
The name hashing is pretty performance-sensitive.
Linus
Linus
Linus
[...]
Any suggestions?So I *think* that this was on purpose, but it's a long time ago, and we've changed some of the hashing since.
we've changed some of the hashing since.
And I think you're wrong that it's a no-op on 32-bit. It's a very expensive and pointless multiplication there too, even if the *shift* ends up being a nop-op.
ends up being a nop-op.
The name hashing is pretty performance-sensitive.
The name hashing is pretty performance-sensitive.
Linus
Linus
Linus
