From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Michael K. Edwards" Subject: Re: Extensible hashing and RCU Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 07:07:16 -0800 Message-ID: References: <200702191913.08125.dada1@cosmosbay.com> <20070220092523.GA6238@2ka.mipt.ru> <200702201104.16200.dada1@cosmosbay.com> <20070220.021209.39159087.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dada1@cosmosbay.com, johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru, akepner@sgi.com, linux@horizon.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, bcrl@kvack.org To: "David Miller" Return-path: Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.168]:2909 "EHLO ug-out-1314.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964970AbXBTPHT (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Feb 2007 10:07:19 -0500 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 44so808339uga for ; Tue, 20 Feb 2007 07:07:18 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20070220.021209.39159087.davem@davemloft.net> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On 2/20/07, David Miller wrote: > Actually someone (I think it was Evgeniy in fact) made such > comparisons and found in his studies that not only does the current > ehash xor hash function distribute about as well as jenkins, it's > significantly cheaper to calculate :-) However, it's vulnerable to hash collision attacks, which the Jenkins hash (used as a poor man's HMAC with a boot-time random salt) is not. But if you don't care about DoS .... Cheers, - Michael