From: "kreijack@inwind.it" <kreijack@inwind.it>
To: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: R: Re: [PATCH 1/2] btrfs-progs: utils: Introduce new pseudo random API
Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 13:08:31 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <254003815.145831464260911184.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost> (raw)
>----Messaggio originale----
>Da: "Qu Wenruo" <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com>
>Data: 26/05/2016 2.38
>A: <kreijack@inwind.it>
>Ogg: Re: [PATCH 1/2] btrfs-progs: utils: Introduce new pseudo random API
>
>
>
>Goffredo Baroncelli wrote on 2016/05/25 18:15 +0200:
>> On 2016-05-25 06:14, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>>> +void rand_seed(u64 seed)
>>> +{
>>> + int i;
>>> + /* only use the last 48 bits */
>>> + for (i = 0; i < 3; i++) {
>>> + seeds[i] = (unsigned short)(seed ^ (unsigned short)(-1));
>>> + seed >>= 16;
>>> + }
>>> + seed_initlized = 1;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +u32 rand_u32(void)
>>> +{
>>> + struct timeval tv;
>>> +
>>> + if (seed_initlized)
>>> + return nrand48(seeds);
>>> +
>>> + /*
>>> + * It's possible to use /dev/random, but we don't need that true
>>> + * random number nor want to wait for entropy,
>>> + * since we're only using random API to do corruption to test.
>>> + * Time and pid/ppid based seed would be good enough, and won't
>>> + * cause sleep for entropy pool.
>>> + */
>>> + gettimeofday(&tv, 0);
>>> + seeds[0] = getpid() ^ (tv.tv_sec & 0xFFFF);
>>> + seeds[1] = getppid() ^ (tv.tv_usec & 0xFFFF);
>>> + seeds[2] = (tv.tv_sec ^ tv.tv_usec) >> 16;
>>> + seed_initlized = 1;
>>> +
>>> + return (u32)nrand48(seeds);
>>> +}
>>
>>
>> Just for my curiosity, which is the advantage of rand48() respect to rand()
if we utilize only the
>> lower 32 bit ? It wouldn't be more simple to use:
>
>Of course rand() is my first candidate.
>
>However a quick check on manpage of rand(3) shows, the up limit of
>RAND_MAX, is not always the same.
>
>In my system, RAND_MAX is 2^31 -1, while example code from rand(3)
>assumes the up limit is 32767.
In glibc RAND_MAX is always ~2^31: http://www.gnu.
org/software/libc/manual/html_node/ISO-Random.html
If it is true for glibc, it should be true also for the others linux libc
(dietlibc[1], musl[2]); I think that assuming in linux RAND_MAX = 2^31-1
should be safe.
BR
Goffredo
[1] https://github.com/ensc/dietlibc/blob/master/include/stdlib.h#L101
[2] https://github.com/cloudius-systems/musl/blob/master/include/stdlib.h#L81
next reply other threads:[~2016-05-26 11:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-05-26 11:08 kreijack [this message]
2016-05-27 0:41 ` R: Re: [PATCH 1/2] btrfs-progs: utils: Introduce new pseudo random API Qu Wenruo
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=254003815.145831464260911184.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost \
--to=kreijack@inwind.it \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox