[PATCH] D41993: [ELF] - Change shift2 constant of GNU_HASH from 6->11.

[George Rimar via llvm-commits]

>You forgot to attach your patches?

Right, sorry. Attached now.

>I do not understand the theory. Adding 1 bits to a bloom filter only increases the chance of false positives, no? A bloom filter that
>has more 1 bits has higher probability of false positives.

I think answer is both "yes" and "no". Otherwise testing results would probably be different.

I think it is both increases chance of false positive because of natural reasons you mentioned,
but looks at the same time it increases chance to select different bits during lookup,
so gives greater chance to select zero instead of existent 1 for symbol that is not in table.
Balance seems to be somewhere in between.?

Probably best way to check/prove it is to benchmark to count false positives during lookup somehow.
I can think of built-in LLD benchmark atm. It could take existent symbols, modify their names slightly and
perform lookup.

George.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20180123/73b8557f/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: most_0.patch
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 134073 bytes
Desc: most_0.patch
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20180123/73b8557f/attachment-0002.obj>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: most_1.patch
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 134073 bytes
Desc: most_1.patch
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20180123/73b8557f/attachment-0003.obj>