few comments on hash distribution added

hash_func.c

@@ -111,15 +111,24 @@ int new_hash( str call_id, str cseq_nr )
 		//hash_code+=crc_32_tab[(cseq_nr.s[i]+hash_code)%243];
 		hash_code+=ccitt_tab[*(cs+i)+123];
 
+	/* hash_code conditioning */
 #ifdef _BUG
+	/* not flat ... % 111b has shorter period than
+       & 111b by one and results in different distribution;
+	   ( 7 % 7 == 0, 7 %7 == 1 )
+ 	   % is used as a part of the hash function too, not only
+	   for rounding; & is not flat; whoever comes up with
+	   a nicer flat hash function which does not take
+	   costly division is welcome; feel free to verify
+	   distribution using hashtest()
+    */
 	hash_code &= (TABLE_ENTRIES-1); /* TABLE_ENTRIES = 2^k */
 #endif
-	/* hash_code conditioning */
 	hash_code=hash_code%(TABLE_ENTRIES-1)+1;
    	return hash_code;
 }
 
-void hashtest_cycle( int hits[TABLE_ENTRIES], char *ip )
+void hashtest_cycle( int hits[TABLE_ENTRIES+5], char *ip )
 {
 	long int i,j,k, l;
 	int  hashv;
@@ -151,20 +160,23 @@ int init_hash()
 			1<<10);
 		LOG(L_WARN, "WARNING: use of %d entries may lead "
 			"to unflat distribution\n", TABLE_ENTRIES );
+	} else {
+		DBG("DEBUG: hash function initialized with optimum table size\n");
 	}
 	return 1;
 }
 
 void hashtest()
 {
-	int hits[TABLE_ENTRIES];
+	int hits[TABLE_ENTRIES+5];
 	int i;
-	
+
+	init_hash();	
 	memset( hits, 0, sizeof hits );
 	hashtest_cycle( hits, "192.168.99.100" );
 	hashtest_cycle( hits, "172.168.99.100" );
 	hashtest_cycle( hits, "142.168.99.100" );
-	for (i=0; i<TABLE_ENTRIES; i++)
+	for (i=0; i<TABLE_ENTRIES+5; i++)
 		printf("[%d. %d]\n", i, hits[i] );
 	exit(0);
 }