On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
> Thomas Helland writes:
>
>> This should give better cache locality, less memory consumption,
>> less code, and should also be faster since we avoid a modulo operation.
>> Also change table size to be power of two.
>> This gives better performa
Thomas Helland writes:
> On 31 Mar 2015 02:19, "Eric Anholt" wrote:
>>
>> Thomas Helland writes:
>>
>> > This should give better cache locality, less memory consumption,
>> > less code, and should also be faster since we avoid a modulo operation.
>> > Also change table size to be power of two.
On 31 Mar 2015 02:19, "Eric Anholt" wrote:
>
> Thomas Helland writes:
>
> > This should give better cache locality, less memory consumption,
> > less code, and should also be faster since we avoid a modulo operation.
> > Also change table size to be power of two.
> > This gives better performance
Thomas Helland writes:
> This should give better cache locality, less memory consumption,
> less code, and should also be faster since we avoid a modulo operation.
> Also change table size to be power of two.
> This gives better performance as we can do bitmasking instead of
> modulo operations f
This should give better cache locality, less memory consumption,
less code, and should also be faster since we avoid a modulo operation.
Also change table size to be power of two.
This gives better performance as we can do bitmasking instead of
modulo operations for fitting the hash in the address
