David, On Wed, 31 May 2006, David Miller wrote: > > For sure and there are plans afoot to move over to > dynamic table sizing and the Jenkins hash function. Yes, that could be far more efficient. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Question about tcp hash function tcp_hashfn()
- From: Evgeniy Polyakov <[email protected]>
- Re: Question about tcp hash function tcp_hashfn()
- References:
- Re: Question about tcp hash function tcp_hashfn()
- From: "Brian F. G. Bidulock" <[email protected]>
- Re: Question about tcp hash function tcp_hashfn()
- From: David Miller <[email protected]>
- Re: Question about tcp hash function tcp_hashfn()
- From: "Brian F. G. Bidulock" <[email protected]>
- Re: Question about tcp hash function tcp_hashfn()
- From: David Miller <[email protected]>
- Re: Question about tcp hash function tcp_hashfn()
- Prev by Date: Re: Question about tcp hash function tcp_hashfn()
- Next by Date: Re: XFS related hang (was Re: How to send a break? - dump from frozen 64bit linux)
- Previous by thread: Re: Question about tcp hash function tcp_hashfn()
- Next by thread: Re: Question about tcp hash function tcp_hashfn()
- Index(es):
 |