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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).