* Lai Jiangshan ([email protected]) wrote: > They are the same, but I don't think the compiler > can optimize it.
Can you double-check this by comparing assembly output ? > > And it also helps for understanding the following code. I try to use "get_count_order" in the algorithms everywhere so we have only a single semantic to keep in mind. Thanks, Mathieu > > Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <[email protected]> > --- > rculfhash.c | 2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/rculfhash.c b/rculfhash.c > index edbd24a..7b880d7 100644 > --- a/rculfhash.c > +++ b/rculfhash.c > @@ -719,7 +719,7 @@ struct _cds_lfht_node *lookup_bucket(struct cds_lfht *ht, > unsigned long size, > > assert(size > 0); > index = hash & (size - 1); > - order = get_count_order_ulong(index + 1); > + order = fls_ulong(index); > > dbg_printf("lookup hash %lu index %lu order %lu aridx %lu\n", > hash, index, order, index & (!order ? 0 : ((1UL << (order - > 1)) - 1))); > -- > 1.7.4.4 > -- Mathieu Desnoyers Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.com _______________________________________________ ltt-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.casi.polymtl.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ltt-dev
