On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 12:28:08PM +0200, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 12:19 PM, Daniel Shahaf <danielsh_at_apache.org> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 10:15:31AM -0000, danielsh_at_apache.org wrote:
> > > Author: danielsh
> > > Date: Mon Jun 24 10:15:31 2013
> > > New Revision: 1495978
> > >
> > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1495978
> > > Log:
> > > Silence a compiler warning.
> > >
> > > * subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/tree.c
> > > (cache_lookup): Only declare FACTOR when it is used.
> > >
> > > Modified:
> > > subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/tree.c
> > >
> > > Modified: subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/tree.c
> > > URL:
> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/tree.c?rev=1495978&r1=1495977&r2=1495978&view=diff
> > >
> > ==============================================================================
> > > --- subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/tree.c (original)
> > > +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/tree.c Mon Jun 24 10:15:31
> > 2013
> > > @@ -342,8 +342,10 @@ cache_lookup( fs_fs_dag_cache_t *cache
> > > apr_size_t path_len = strlen(path);
> > > apr_uint32_t hash_value = (apr_uint32_t)revision;
> > >
> > > +#if SVN_UNALIGNED_ACCESS_IS_OK
> > > /* "randomizing" / distributing factor used in our hash function */
> > > const apr_uint32_t factor = 0xd1f3da69;
> > > +#endif
> > >
> >
> > Is this the right fix? Right now, the !SVN_UNALIGNED_ACCESS_IS_OK hash
> > function is just (x[n] + 33^1 x[n-1] + ... + 33^(n-1) x[1] + 33^n x[0]).
> >
>
> Yep. That is good enough for the access patterns
> the we see here: tree walks.
Cool. I'll go ahead and add it to STATUS then (so that we don't have compiler
warnings in 1.8.1). If you don't mind I'll just append it to your branch.
Received on 2013-06-24 12:30:13 CEST