X-Git-Url: http://repo.macrolet.net/gitweb/?a=blobdiff_plain;f=src%2Fpcl%2Fcache.lisp;h=11659226a160638915212a61b60b9ce1f94ad2e1;hb=HEAD;hp=3204dbef49fbafb934cf283ad06569bf385e5301;hpb=229d5b35ac98f606f24c90d8e5cc037cae3829cd;p=sbcl.git

diff --git a/src/pcl/cache.lisp b/src/pcl/cache.lisp
index 3204dbe..1165922 100644
--- a/src/pcl/cache.lisp
+++ b/src/pcl/cache.lisp
@@ -53,7 +53,7 @@
 ;;;;
 ;;;; * Since the cache is used for memoization only we don't need to
 ;;;;   worry about which of simultaneous replacements (when expanding
-;;;;   the cache) takes place: the loosing one will have its work
+;;;;   the cache) takes place: the losing one will have its work
 ;;;;   redone later. This also allows us to drop entries when the
 ;;;;   cache is about to grow insanely huge.
 ;;;;
@@ -104,11 +104,6 @@
   ;; bits at the low end.
   (logand (1- vector-length) (- line-size)))
 
-;;; The smallest power of two that is equal to or greater then X.
-(declaim (inline power-of-two-ceiling))
-(defun power-of-two-ceiling (x)
-  (ash 1 (integer-length (1- x))))
-
 (defun cache-statistics (cache)
   (let* ((vector (cache-vector cache))
          (size (length vector))
@@ -341,8 +336,8 @@
              (cache-mask copy) (compute-cache-mask length (cache-line-size cache))
              (cache-limit copy) (compute-limit (/ length (cache-line-size cache))))
        ;; First insert the new one -- if we don't do this first and
-       ;; the cache has reached it's maximum size we may end up
-       ;; looping in FILL-CACHE.
+       ;; the cache has reached its maximum size we may end up looping
+       ;; in FILL-CACHE.
        (unless (try-update-cache copy layouts value)
          (bug "Could not insert ~S:~S to supposedly empty ~S." layouts value copy))
        (map-cache (if drop-random-entries
@@ -353,22 +348,15 @@
                       ;; rut: add A causing B to drop, then add B
                       ;; causing A to drop... repeat ad nauseam,
                       ;; spending most of the time here instead of
-                      ;; doing real work. 50% because if we drop to
+                      ;; doing real work. 50% because if we drop too
                       ;; few we need to do this almost right away
-                      ;; again, and if we drop to many, we need to
+                      ;; again, and if we drop too many, we need to
                       ;; recompute more then we'd like.
                       ;; _Experimentally_ 50% seems to perform the
                       ;; best, but it would be nice to have a proper
                       ;; analysis...
-                      (flet ((random-fixnum ()
-                               (random (1+ most-positive-fixnum))))
-                        (let ((drops (random-fixnum)))
-                          (declare (fixnum drops))
-                          (lambda (layouts value)
-                            (when (logbitp 0 drops)
-                              (try-update-cache copy layouts value))
-                            (when (zerop (ash drops -1))
-                              (setf drops (random-fixnum))))))
+                      (randomly-punting-lambda (layouts value)
+                        (try-update-cache copy layouts value))
                       (lambda (layouts value)
                         (unless (try-update-cache copy layouts value)
                           ;; Didn't fit -- expand the cache, or drop