Re: [PATCH v7 15/16] openvswitch: use new hashtable implementation
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <hidden>
Date: 2012-10-29 18:35:15
Also in:
dm-devel, linux-mm, linux-nfs, lkml
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <hidden>
Date: 2012-10-29 18:35:15
Also in:
dm-devel, linux-mm, linux-nfs, lkml
* Tejun Heo (tj-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org) wrote:
Hello, On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 02:16:48PM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:quoted
This is just one example in an attempt to show why different hash table users may have different constraints: for a hash table entirely populated by keys generated internally by the kernel, a random seed might not be required, but for cases where values are fed by user-space and from the NIC, I would argue that flexibility to implement a randomizable hash function beats implementation simplicity any time. And you could keep the basic use-case simple by providing hints to the hash_32()/hash_64()/hash_ulong() helpers in comments.If all you need is throwing in a salt value to avoid attacks, can't you just do that from caller side? Scrambling the key before feeding it into hash_*() should work, no?
Yes, I think salting the "key" parameter would work. Thanks, Mathieu
Thanks. -- tejun
-- Mathieu Desnoyers Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.com