/* * Copyright (C) 2006. Bob Jenkins (bob_jenkins@burtleburtle.net) * * https://burtleburtle.net/bob/hash/ * * These are the credits from Bob's sources: * * lookup3.c, by Bob Jenkins, May 2006, Public Domain. * * These are functions for producing 32-bit hashes for hash table lookup. * hashword(), hashlittle(), hashlittle2(), hashbig(), mix(), and final() * are externally useful functions. Routines to test the hash are included * if SELF_TEST is defined. You can use this free for any purpose. It's in * the public domain. It has no warranty. */ /* * I've chopped and wrapped Jenkins' work. * Any bugs belong to me... :-( * -Alex */ #include "bpf.h" #define hashsize(n) ((__u32)1<<(n)) #define rot(x,k) (((x)<<(k)) | ((x)>>(32-(k)))) /* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- mix -- mix 3 32-bit values reversibly. This is reversible, so any information in (a,b,c) before mix() is still in (a,b,c) after mix(). If four pairs of (a,b,c) inputs are run through mix(), or through mix() in reverse, there are at least 32 bits of the output that are sometimes the same for one pair and different for another pair. This was tested for: * pairs that differed by one bit, by two bits, in any combination of top bits of (a,b,c), or in any combination of bottom bits of (a,b,c). * "differ" is defined as +, -, ^, or ~^. For + and -, I transformed the output delta to a Gray code (a^(a>>1)) so a string of 1's (as is commonly produced by subtraction) look like a single 1-bit difference. * the base values were pseudorandom, all zero but one bit set, or all zero plus a counter that starts at zero. Some k values for my "a-=c; a^=rot(c,k); c+=b;" arrangement that satisfy this are 4 6 8 16 19 4 9 15 3 18 27 15 14 9 3 7 17 3 Well, "9 15 3 18 27 15" didn't quite get 32 bits diffing for "differ" defined as + with a one-bit base and a two-bit delta. I used http://burtleburtle.net/bob/hash/avalanche.html to choose the operations, constants, and arrangements of the variables. This does not achieve avalanche. There are input bits of (a,b,c) that fail to affect some output bits of (a,b,c), especially of a. The most thoroughly mixed value is c, but it doesn't really even achieve avalanche in c. This allows some parallelism. Read-after-writes are good at doubling the number of bits affected, so the goal of mixing pulls in the opposite direction as the goal of parallelism. I did what I could. Rotates seem to cost as much as shifts on every machine I could lay my hands on, and rotates are much kinder to the top and bottom bits, so I used rotates. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- */ #define mix(a,b,c) \ { \ a -= c; a ^= rot(c, 4); c += b; \ b -= a; b ^= rot(a, 6); a += c; \ c -= b; c ^= rot(b, 8); b += a; \ a -= c; a ^= rot(c,16); c += b; \ b -= a; b ^= rot(a,19); a += c; \ c -= b; c ^= rot(b, 4); b += a; \ } /* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- final -- final mixing of 3 32-bit values (a,b,c) into c Pairs of (a,b,c) values differing in only a few bits will usually produce values of c that look totally different. This was tested for * pairs that differed by one bit, by two bits, in any combination of top bits of (a,b,c), or in any combination of bottom bits of (a,b,c). * "differ" is defined as +, -, ^, or ~^. For + and -, I transformed the output delta to a Gray code (a^(a>>1)) so a string of 1's (as is commonly produced by subtraction) look like a single 1-bit difference. * the base values were pseudorandom, all zero but one bit set, or all zero plus a counter that starts at zero. These constants passed: 14 11 25 16 4 14 24 12 14 25 16 4 14 24 and these came close: 4 8 15 26 3 22 24 10 8 15 26 3 22 24 11 8 15 26 3 22 24 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- */ #define final(a,b,c) \ { \ c ^= b; c -= rot(b,14);\ a ^= c; a -= rot(c,11);\ b ^= a; b -= rot(a,25);\ c ^= b; c -= rot(b,16);\ a ^= c; a -= rot(c,4); \ b ^= a; b -= rot(a,14);\ c ^= b; c -= rot(b,24);\ } /* -------------------------------------------------------------------- This works on all machines. To be useful, it requires -- that the key be an array of __u32's, and -- that the length be the number of __u32's in the key The function hashword() is identical to hashlittle() on little-endian machines, and identical to hashbig() on big-endian machines, except that the length has to be measured in __u32s rather than in bytes. hashlittle() is more complicated than hashword() only because hashlittle() has to dance around fitting the key bytes into registers. -------------------------------------------------------------------- */ static CALI_BPF_INLINE __u32 hashword( const __u32 *k, /* the key, an array of __u32 values */ size_t length, /* the length of the key, in __u32s */ __u32 initval /* the previous hash, or an arbitrary value */) { __u32 a,b,c; /* Set up the internal state */ a = b = c = 0xdeadbeef + (((__u32)length)<<2) + initval; /*------------------------------------------------- handle most of the key */ while (length > 3) { a += k[0]; b += k[1]; c += k[2]; mix(a,b,c); length -= 3; k += 3; } /*------------------------------------------- handle the last 3 __u32's */ /* all the case statements fall through */ switch(length){ case 3 : c+=k[2]; case 2 : b+=k[1]; case 1 : a+=k[0]; final(a,b,c); case 0: /* case 0: nothing left to add */ break; } /*------------------------------------------------------ report the result */ return c; }