On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 06:20:08PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 2015-07-13 17:14, Bruce Richardson: > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 05:11:54PM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 12:29:53AM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > > 2015-07-11 01:18, Pablo de Lara: > > > > > The main change when creating a new table is that the number of > > > > > entries > > > > > per bucket is fixed now, so its parameter is ignored now > > > > > (still there to maintain the same parameters structure). > > > > > > > > Why not rename the "bucket_entries" field to "reserved"? > > > > The API of this field has changed (now ignored) so it should be > > > > reflected > > > > without changing the ABI. > > > > > > Since the hash_create function is itself already versionned to take > > > account of the > > > new struct parameter, there is no reason to keep the field at all, as far > > > as I can see. > > > We can just drop it, and let the ABI versionning handle the change. > > > > > > /Bruce > > > > Sorry, my mistake. It's no longer versioned in the patchset that was > > merged, so > > the field does need to be kept. :-( > > So do you agree to submit a patch which rename the unused field?
Yes. It should be in your inbox now... :-)
