From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Simon Horman Subject: Re: [PATCH 19/25] mlx4: Randomizing mac addresses for slaves Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 18:07:46 +1100 Message-ID: <20091106070736.GA12697@verge.net.au> References: <4AF19E69.8070605@mellanox.co.il> <15ddcffd0911041333l165ee274mfae3508a3db755e7@mail.gmail.com> <2ED289D4E09FBD4D92D911E869B97FDD0166CA59@mtlexch01.mtl.com> <20091106040624.GA6629@verge.net.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Liran Liss , Or Gerlitz , Yevgeny Petrilin , linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Tziporet Koren To: Roland Dreier Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 10:08:58PM -0800, Roland Dreier wrote: > > > > igb uses the full output of random_ether_addr(). I'd be fine with > > > that. However setting the OUI means you only get 24 bits of randomness > > > which makes a collision a lot more likely. > > > > IIRC that was precisely why the OUI isn't used for the igb driver. > > > > Perhaps some infrastructure (by which I mean a random_mac() function) > > is warranted so at least this discussion can be concentrated around that > > rather than repeating it for each driver that needs random mac addresses. > > What would be the difference between random_mac() and the existing > random_ether_addr() function? Sorry, I was mistaken. igb is using random_ether_addr(), which is what I had in mind. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html