linux-kernel - Re: [TOMOYO #10 (linux-next) 4/8] Memory and pathname management functions.

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]

Message-Id: <20081009151840.ac066cc6.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Thu, 9 Oct 2008 15:18:40 +0900
From:	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Kentaro Takeda <takedakn@...data.co.jp>
Cc:	Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>,
	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Toshiharu Harada <haradats@...data.co.jp>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Subject: Re: [TOMOYO #10 (linux-next) 4/8] Memory and pathname management
 functions.

a nitpick.

On Thu, 09 Oct 2008 13:28:18 +0900
Kentaro Takeda <takedakn@...data.co.jp> wrote:

> +static unsigned int allocated_memory_for_savename;
> +static unsigned int quota_for_savename;
> +
> +#define MAX_HASH 256
> +
Maybe based on typical workload and usage but
It's better to write why hash size is fixed size of "256", when you
use hash. 

Thanks,
-Kame

--
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/