[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RFC] enhanced version of net_random()

To: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [RFC] enhanced version of net_random()
From: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 21:28:57 +0200
Cc: davem@xxxxxxxxxx, alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, tytso@xxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20040813115140.0f09d889@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20040812104835.3b179f5a@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040812124854.646f1936.davem@xxxxxxxxxx> <20040813115140.0f09d889@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 11:51:40 -0700
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Here is another alternative, using tansworthe generator.  It uses percpu
> state. The one small semantic change is the net_srandom() only affects
> the current cpu's seed.  The problem was that having it change all cpu's
> seed would mean adding locking 

I would just update the other CPUs without locking. Taking
a random number from a partially updated state shouldn't be a big 


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>