linux-kernel - Re: A little coding style nugget of joy

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 19 Sep 2007 23:30:10 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...ealbox.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, andi@...stfloor.org,
	kernel1@...erdogtech.com
Subject: Re: A little coding style nugget of joy

> This is a terrible assumption in general (i.e. if filesize % blocksize 
> is close to uniformly distributed).  If you remove one byte and the data 
> is stored with blocksize B, then you either save zero bytes with 
> probability 1-1/B or you save B bytes with probability 1/B.  The 
> expected number of bytes saved is B*1/B=1.  Since expectation is linear, 
> if you remove x bytes, the expected number of bytes saved is x (even if 
> there is more than one byte removed per file).

You didn't calculate the probability of actually saving a full block 
or not (that's the only thing that matters). I assumed it's relatively
small and can be ignored in practice since the amount of end white
space is negligible compared to total file size.

-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/