From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@osdl.org>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
netdev@oss.sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] enhanced version of net_random()
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 13:02:15 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <411BCCC7.2090804@candelatech.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040812104835.3b179f5a@dell_ss3.pdx.osdl.net>
Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> While doing the network emulator, I discovered that the default net_random()
> is too stupid, and get_random_bytes() is more than needed. Rather than put
> another function in just for sch_netem, how about making net_random() smarter?
> The tin-hat crowd already replace net_random() with get_random_bytes anyway.
>
> Here is a proposed alternative to use a longer period PRNG for net_random().
> The choice of TT800 was because it was freely available, had a long period,
> was fast and relatively small footprint. The existing net_random() was not
> really thread safe, but was immune to thread corruption.
Is it really worth the extra spin lock & math? Maybe we could have a
net_more_random() method instead that encompasses this improved random logic?
Ben
--
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-08-12 20:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-08-12 17:48 [RFC] enhanced version of net_random() Stephen Hemminger
2004-08-12 19:48 ` David S. Miller
2004-08-13 18:51 ` Stephen Hemminger
2004-08-13 19:28 ` Andi Kleen
2004-08-16 6:27 ` David S. Miller
2004-08-12 20:02 ` Ben Greear [this message]
2004-08-20 17:59 ` Jean-Luc Cooke
2004-08-20 18:47 ` David S. Miller
2004-08-20 18:59 ` Andreas Dilger
2004-08-20 19:22 ` Richard B. Johnson
2004-08-20 19:48 ` David S. Miller
2004-08-20 19:53 ` Jean-Luc Cooke
2004-08-22 15:04 ` Andi Kleen
2004-08-23 17:05 ` Stephen Hemminger
2004-08-23 18:09 ` Richard B. Johnson
2004-08-20 21:24 ` Lee Revell
2004-08-20 23:55 ` Alan Cox
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=411BCCC7.2090804@candelatech.com \
--to=greearb@candelatech.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=davem@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
--cc=shemminger@osdl.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.