sizeof(long) assumed to be 32? about jerasure HOT 4 CLOSED

I’ve spent some more time today walking through the code, and I think the anomaly in jerasure_05.c is just a casual bug. Carefully comparing the differences between galois_w08_region_multiply(),
galois_w16_region_multiply(), and galois_w32_region_multiply(), it would appear that jerasure assumes that char are 8 bits, short ints are 16 bits, and ints are 32 bits.

Personally, I think the code could be improved by using the explicit fixed-width types (int8_t, int1t6_t, int32_t) where appropriate and consistently using sizeof(). I’m also finding unused variables and other cruft that could stand to be cleaned up.

I’ll probably take some time to make some of these changes, as my code must compile consistently for both 32 and 64 bit architectures. Let me know if anyone is interested in having me contribute these changes back to this project.

from jerasure.

So, this github repo was really just a mirror of Jerasure that I was using for a bit of hacking, but it's really gained some popularity recently. Jerasure's author, James Plank, has released a version 2, and it lives at https://bitbucket.org/jimplank/jerasure . That codebase is supposedly noticably faster, as well as being actively maintained by the actual author of the project. I've been trying to decide lately whether I should delete this repo, replace it with a file directing users to Plank's repo, or maybe try to keep an active mirror of his work here. Either way, could you check to see if his current codebase has the issues you've found? If it does, I think that updating that project would be better than devoting time to this one.

from jerasure.

Thanks for the update. I’ll definately follow the version 2 project. I had just started to work on optimizing the code for performance, and it looks like the author’s new version does exactly what I was attempting.

I’m terribly greatful for this project, because its existence led me to the jeasure code in the first place. But it does seem counterproductive to have two copies of the same project, since the original is also accessible through git. I’d vote for deleteing this project, or at least turn it into a mirror.

from jerasure.

I've changed the project link and switched master to a mirror of v2. I'll try to keep it up to date, but I think that a mirror is better than deleting the project. Lots more people use github than bitbucket, so as long as this keeps Jerasure discoverable, I'll keep it available.

from jerasure.