| To: | root@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] enhanced version of net_random() |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 20 Aug 2004 12:48:23 -0700 |
| Cc: | adilger@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, jlcooke@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, shemminger@xxxxxxxx, alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, tytso@xxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.LNX.4.53.0408201518250.25319@chaos> |
| References: | <20040812104835.3b179f5a@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040820175952.GI5806@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040820185956.GV8967@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.53.0408201518250.25319@chaos> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 15:22:09 -0400 (EDT) "Richard B. Johnson" <root@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The attached code will certainly work on Intel machines. It is > in the public domain, having been modified by myself to produce > a very long sequence... How long a period does it have? The one we're adding to the networking has one which is 2^88. > I wouldn't suggest converting it to 'C' because the rotation > takes many CPU instructions when one tries to do the test, shift, > and OR in 'C', You only need 2 'shifts' and an 'or' to do a rotate in C. No tests are needed. |
| Previous by Date: | Re: [RFC] enhanced version of net_random(), Richard B. Johnson |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [RFC] enhanced version of net_random(), Jean-Luc Cooke |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [RFC] enhanced version of net_random(), Richard B. Johnson |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [RFC] enhanced version of net_random(), Jean-Luc Cooke |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |