| To: | Jean-Luc Cooke <jlcooke@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] enhanced version of net_random() |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 20 Aug 2004 11:47:10 -0700 |
| Cc: | shemminger@xxxxxxxx, alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, tytso@xxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20040820175952.GI5806@certainkey.com> |
| References: | <20040812104835.3b179f5a@dell_ss3.pdx.osdl.net> <20040820175952.GI5806@certainkey.com> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 13:59:52 -0400 Jean-Luc Cooke <jlcooke@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Is there a reason why get_random_bytes() is unsuitable? > > Keeping the number of PRNGs in the kernel to a minimum should a goal we can > all share. Too expensive, this routine will get called potentially multiple times per packet. |
| Previous by Date: | Re: [RFC] enhanced version of net_random(), Jean-Luc Cooke |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [RFC] enhanced version of net_random(), Andreas Dilger |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [RFC] enhanced version of net_random(), Jean-Luc Cooke |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [RFC] enhanced version of net_random(), Andreas Dilger |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |