Re: changed "random" patch for higher precision

[Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>]

George P Nychis wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I modified the "random" patch to support high precision averages ... the original random only supports 1-99% in integer intervals
> 
> The original patch did this by having an 8 bit integer, reading random bytes from the kernel into an 8 bit integer, and testing between 2 and 252 (1*2.55 and 99*2.55 ... 2.55 coming from 255/100).
> 
> Regardless of how the original patch worked, I use a 32 bit integer to support extremely high precision probabilities and changed the ranges to UINT_MAX instead of 255, plus other changes.
> 
> I tested it pretty rigurously on the 2.4 kernel because i'm working on a project right now which required high precision drop probabilities
> 
> My main question is, should i request changes to the random patch, or completely create a new patch and argument?

I already have a version of random with higher precision queued
for 2.6.18. You say you're using UINT_MAX .. can you represent a
probability of both 0 and 1? :)