Re: [PATCH 28/29] net/: rename net_random() to prandom_u32()

Akinobu Mita
2012-12-25T11:47:32Z

2012/12/25 Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>:
> On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 11:14:15AM +0900, Akinobu Mita wrote:
>> Use more preferable function name which implies using a pseudo-random
>> number generator.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@gmail.com>
>> Cc: Jesse Gross <jesse@nicira.com>
>> Cc: Venkat Venkatsubra <venkat.x.venkatsubra@oracle.com>
>> Cc: Vlad Yasevich <vyasevich@gmail.com>
>> Cc: Sridhar Samudrala <sri@us.ibm.com>
>> Cc: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
>> Cc: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>
>> Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
>> Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
>> Cc: linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org
>> Cc: dev@openvswitch.org
>> Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
>> ---
>> include/net/red.h | 2 +-
>> net/802/garp.c | 2 +-
>> net/openvswitch/actions.c | 2 +-
>> net/rds/bind.c | 2 +-
>> net/sctp/socket.c | 2 +-
>> net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c | 2 +-
>> 6 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
> I'm largely indifferent to this patch, but I kind of feel like its just churn.
> Whats the real advantage in making this change? I grant that it clearly
> indicates the type of random number generator we're using at a given call site,
> But for those using net_random, you probably don't care too much about
> the source of your random bits. If you did really want true random vs.
> pseudo-random data, you need to explicitly use the right call. You're previous
> patch series did good cleanup on differentiating the different random calls, but
> this just seems like its removing what is otherwise useful indirection.

I overlooked the importance of net_random() indirection.
Thanks for the feedback. I'll leave all net_random() callers as-is in
the next version.