From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gnu.wildebeest.org (gnu.wildebeest.org [45.83.234.184]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9A9CF38582A7 for ; Mon, 4 Jul 2022 15:40:33 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 9A9CF38582A7 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=klomp.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=klomp.org Received: from tarox.wildebeest.org (83-87-18-245.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl [83.87.18.245]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gnu.wildebeest.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 781A0302AB2C; Mon, 4 Jul 2022 17:40:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: by tarox.wildebeest.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 1A312404AC7E; Mon, 4 Jul 2022 17:40:32 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use xxHash hashing algorithm. From: Mark Wielaard To: Martin =?UTF-8?Q?Li=C5=A1ka?= Cc: dwz@sourceware.org Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2022 17:40:31 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <20220625194440.GA16194@gnu.wildebeest.org> <9936e9f84660a3a47e7a87567bab131d54fdb221.camel@klomp.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5 (3.28.5-10.el7) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: dwz@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Dwz mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2022 15:40:34 -0000 Hi Martin, On Mon, 2022-07-04 at 15:31 +0200, Martin Li=C5=A1ka wrote: > > Please take a look at the updated patch. > >=20 > > I read it again and it looks good to me. >=20 > Fine. Can I install the patch now or should we wait for a follow up > patch that will come up with a proper configuration? I think we can do the configure stuff later. We also should add a check for libelf. One last check. In theory dwz is arch independent, the result of running dwz on a file should be the same whether it is done on a 32/64 bit or big/little-endian machine. To keep things reproducible the hash should be the same across arches. The xxhash documentation states: "hashes are identical across all platforms (little / big endian)". I assume the above holds, even on 32bit arches (we always use XXH64). So unless you know that there are cases where the hash produces different values on some arches then I'll say it is fine to install. Thanks, Mark