move jenkins hash to its own header in libkern

1 files changed, 149 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/sys/libkern/jenkins.h b/sys/libkern/jenkins.h
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4a37fa1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/sys/libkern/jenkins.h
@@ -0,0 +1,149 @@
+#ifndef __LIBKERN_JENKINS_H__
+#define __LIBKERN_JENKINS_H__
+/*
+ * Taken from http://burtleburtle.net/bob/c/lookup3.c
+ * $FreeBSD$
+ */
+
+#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 uint32_t's, and
+ -- that the length be the number of uint32_t'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 uint32_ts rather than in
+ bytes.  hashlittle() is more complicated than hashword() only because
+ hashlittle() has to dance around fitting the key bytes into registers.
+--------------------------------------------------------------------
+*/
+static uint32_t
+jenkins_hashword(
+                const uint32_t *k,  /* the key, an array of uint32_t values */
+                size_t length,      /* the length of the key, in uint32_ts */
+                uint32_t initval    /* the previous hash, or an arbitrary value */
+)
+{
+  uint32_t a,b,c;
+
+  /* Set up the internal state */
+  a = b = c = 0xdeadbeef + (((uint32_t)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 uint32_t's */
+  switch(length)                     /* all the case statements fall through */
+  { 
+  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;
+}
+#endif