1#include"cache.h" 2#include"sha1-lookup.h" 3 4static uint32_ttake2(const unsigned char*sha1) 5{ 6return((sha1[0] <<8) | sha1[1]); 7} 8 9/* 10 * Conventional binary search loop looks like this: 11 * 12 * do { 13 * int mi = (lo + hi) / 2; 14 * int cmp = "entry pointed at by mi" minus "target"; 15 * if (!cmp) 16 * return (mi is the wanted one) 17 * if (cmp > 0) 18 * hi = mi; "mi is larger than target" 19 * else 20 * lo = mi+1; "mi is smaller than target" 21 * } while (lo < hi); 22 * 23 * The invariants are: 24 * 25 * - When entering the loop, lo points at a slot that is never 26 * above the target (it could be at the target), hi points at a 27 * slot that is guaranteed to be above the target (it can never 28 * be at the target). 29 * 30 * - We find a point 'mi' between lo and hi (mi could be the same 31 * as lo, but never can be the same as hi), and check if it hits 32 * the target. There are three cases: 33 * 34 * - if it is a hit, we are happy. 35 * 36 * - if it is strictly higher than the target, we update hi with 37 * it. 38 * 39 * - if it is strictly lower than the target, we update lo to be 40 * one slot after it, because we allow lo to be at the target. 41 * 42 * When choosing 'mi', we do not have to take the "middle" but 43 * anywhere in between lo and hi, as long as lo <= mi < hi is 44 * satisfied. When we somehow know that the distance between the 45 * target and lo is much shorter than the target and hi, we could 46 * pick mi that is much closer to lo than the midway. 47 */ 48/* 49 * The table should contain "nr" elements. 50 * The sha1 of element i (between 0 and nr - 1) should be returned 51 * by "fn(i, table)". 52 */ 53intsha1_pos(const unsigned char*sha1,void*table,size_t nr, 54 sha1_access_fn fn) 55{ 56size_t hi = nr; 57size_t lo =0; 58size_t mi =0; 59 60if(!nr) 61return-1; 62 63if(nr !=1) { 64size_t lov, hiv, miv, ofs; 65 66for(ofs =0; ofs <18; ofs +=2) { 67 lov =take2(fn(0, table) + ofs); 68 hiv =take2(fn(nr -1, table) + ofs); 69 miv =take2(sha1 + ofs); 70if(miv < lov) 71return-1; 72if(hiv < miv) 73return-1- nr; 74if(lov != hiv) { 75/* 76 * At this point miv could be equal 77 * to hiv (but sha1 could still be higher); 78 * the invariant of (mi < hi) should be 79 * kept. 80 */ 81 mi = (nr -1) * (miv - lov) / (hiv - lov); 82if(lo <= mi && mi < hi) 83break; 84die("BUG: assertion failed in binary search"); 85} 86} 87if(18<= ofs) 88die("cannot happen -- lo and hi are identical"); 89} 90 91do{ 92int cmp; 93 cmp =hashcmp(fn(mi, table), sha1); 94if(!cmp) 95return mi; 96if(cmp >0) 97 hi = mi; 98else 99 lo = mi +1; 100 mi = (hi + lo) /2; 101}while(lo < hi); 102return-lo-1; 103} 104 105/* 106 * Conventional binary search loop looks like this: 107 * 108 * unsigned lo, hi; 109 * do { 110 * unsigned mi = (lo + hi) / 2; 111 * int cmp = "entry pointed at by mi" minus "target"; 112 * if (!cmp) 113 * return (mi is the wanted one) 114 * if (cmp > 0) 115 * hi = mi; "mi is larger than target" 116 * else 117 * lo = mi+1; "mi is smaller than target" 118 * } while (lo < hi); 119 * 120 * The invariants are: 121 * 122 * - When entering the loop, lo points at a slot that is never 123 * above the target (it could be at the target), hi points at a 124 * slot that is guaranteed to be above the target (it can never 125 * be at the target). 126 * 127 * - We find a point 'mi' between lo and hi (mi could be the same 128 * as lo, but never can be as same as hi), and check if it hits 129 * the target. There are three cases: 130 * 131 * - if it is a hit, we are happy. 132 * 133 * - if it is strictly higher than the target, we set it to hi, 134 * and repeat the search. 135 * 136 * - if it is strictly lower than the target, we update lo to 137 * one slot after it, because we allow lo to be at the target. 138 * 139 * If the loop exits, there is no matching entry. 140 * 141 * When choosing 'mi', we do not have to take the "middle" but 142 * anywhere in between lo and hi, as long as lo <= mi < hi is 143 * satisfied. When we somehow know that the distance between the 144 * target and lo is much shorter than the target and hi, we could 145 * pick mi that is much closer to lo than the midway. 146 * 147 * Now, we can take advantage of the fact that SHA-1 is a good hash 148 * function, and as long as there are enough entries in the table, we 149 * can expect uniform distribution. An entry that begins with for 150 * example "deadbeef..." is much likely to appear much later than in 151 * the midway of the table. It can reasonably be expected to be near 152 * 87% (222/256) from the top of the table. 153 * 154 * However, we do not want to pick "mi" too precisely. If the entry at 155 * the 87% in the above example turns out to be higher than the target 156 * we are looking for, we would end up narrowing the search space down 157 * only by 13%, instead of 50% we would get if we did a simple binary 158 * search. So we would want to hedge our bets by being less aggressive. 159 * 160 * The table at "table" holds at least "nr" entries of "elem_size" 161 * bytes each. Each entry has the SHA-1 key at "key_offset". The 162 * table is sorted by the SHA-1 key of the entries. The caller wants 163 * to find the entry with "key", and knows that the entry at "lo" is 164 * not higher than the entry it is looking for, and that the entry at 165 * "hi" is higher than the entry it is looking for. 166 */ 167intsha1_entry_pos(const void*table, 168size_t elem_size, 169size_t key_offset, 170unsigned lo,unsigned hi,unsigned nr, 171const unsigned char*key) 172{ 173const unsigned char*base = table; 174const unsigned char*hi_key, *lo_key; 175unsigned ofs_0; 176static int debug_lookup = -1; 177 178if(debug_lookup <0) 179 debug_lookup = !!getenv("GIT_DEBUG_LOOKUP"); 180 181if(!nr || lo >= hi) 182return-1; 183 184if(nr == hi) 185 hi_key = NULL; 186else 187 hi_key = base + elem_size * hi + key_offset; 188 lo_key = base + elem_size * lo + key_offset; 189 190 ofs_0 =0; 191do{ 192int cmp; 193unsigned ofs, mi, range; 194unsigned lov, hiv, kyv; 195const unsigned char*mi_key; 196 197 range = hi - lo; 198if(hi_key) { 199for(ofs = ofs_0; ofs <20; ofs++) 200if(lo_key[ofs] != hi_key[ofs]) 201break; 202 ofs_0 = ofs; 203/* 204 * byte 0 thru (ofs-1) are the same between 205 * lo and hi; ofs is the first byte that is 206 * different. 207 * 208 * If ofs==20, then no bytes are different, 209 * meaning we have entries with duplicate 210 * keys. We know that we are in a solid run 211 * of this entry (because the entries are 212 * sorted, and our lo and hi are the same, 213 * there can be nothing but this single key 214 * in between). So we can stop the search. 215 * Either one of these entries is it (and 216 * we do not care which), or we do not have 217 * it. 218 * 219 * Furthermore, we know that one of our 220 * endpoints must be the edge of the run of 221 * duplicates. For example, given this 222 * sequence: 223 * 224 * idx 0 1 2 3 4 5 225 * key A C C C C D 226 * 227 * If we are searching for "B", we might 228 * hit the duplicate run at lo=1, hi=3 229 * (e.g., by first mi=3, then mi=0). But we 230 * can never have lo > 1, because B < C. 231 * That is, if our key is less than the 232 * run, we know that "lo" is the edge, but 233 * we can say nothing of "hi". Similarly, 234 * if our key is greater than the run, we 235 * know that "hi" is the edge, but we can 236 * say nothing of "lo". 237 * 238 * Therefore if we do not find it, we also 239 * know where it would go if it did exist: 240 * just on the far side of the edge that we 241 * know about. 242 */ 243if(ofs ==20) { 244 mi = lo; 245 mi_key = base + elem_size * mi + key_offset; 246 cmp =memcmp(mi_key, key,20); 247if(!cmp) 248return mi; 249if(cmp <0) 250return-1- hi; 251else 252return-1- lo; 253} 254 255 hiv = hi_key[ofs_0]; 256if(ofs_0 <19) 257 hiv = (hiv <<8) | hi_key[ofs_0+1]; 258}else{ 259 hiv =256; 260if(ofs_0 <19) 261 hiv <<=8; 262} 263 lov = lo_key[ofs_0]; 264 kyv = key[ofs_0]; 265if(ofs_0 <19) { 266 lov = (lov <<8) | lo_key[ofs_0+1]; 267 kyv = (kyv <<8) | key[ofs_0+1]; 268} 269assert(lov < hiv); 270 271if(kyv < lov) 272return-1- lo; 273if(hiv < kyv) 274return-1- hi; 275 276/* 277 * Even if we know the target is much closer to 'hi' 278 * than 'lo', if we pick too precisely and overshoot 279 * (e.g. when we know 'mi' is closer to 'hi' than to 280 * 'lo', pick 'mi' that is higher than the target), we 281 * end up narrowing the search space by a smaller 282 * amount (i.e. the distance between 'mi' and 'hi') 283 * than what we would have (i.e. about half of 'lo' 284 * and 'hi'). Hedge our bets to pick 'mi' less 285 * aggressively, i.e. make 'mi' a bit closer to the 286 * middle than we would otherwise pick. 287 */ 288 kyv = (kyv *6+ lov + hiv) /8; 289if(lov < hiv -1) { 290if(kyv == lov) 291 kyv++; 292else if(kyv == hiv) 293 kyv--; 294} 295 mi = (range -1) * (kyv - lov) / (hiv - lov) + lo; 296 297if(debug_lookup) { 298printf("lo%uhi%urg%umi%u", lo, hi, range, mi); 299printf("ofs%ulov%x, hiv%x, kyv%x\n", 300 ofs_0, lov, hiv, kyv); 301} 302if(!(lo <= mi && mi < hi)) 303die("assertion failure lo%umi%uhi%u %s", 304 lo, mi, hi,sha1_to_hex(key)); 305 306 mi_key = base + elem_size * mi + key_offset; 307 cmp =memcmp(mi_key + ofs_0, key + ofs_0,20- ofs_0); 308if(!cmp) 309return mi; 310if(cmp >0) { 311 hi = mi; 312 hi_key = mi_key; 313}else{ 314 lo = mi +1; 315 lo_key = mi_key + elem_size; 316} 317}while(lo < hi); 318return-lo-1; 319}