| 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 PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 17:17:00 -0700 From: Tony Luck <tony.luck@...il.com> To: Seiji Aguchi <seiji.aguchi@....com> Cc: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>, Madper Xie <cxie@...hat.com>, "matt.fleming@...el.com" <matt.fleming@...el.com>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux EFI <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>, 谢成骏 <bbboson@...il.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make efi-pstore return a unique id On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Seiji Aguchi <seiji.aguchi@....com> wrote: >> What about feeding the bytes of all three integers into a non-cryptographic hash function? >> Using this way you get a cheap unique id. > > It is reasonable to me. How does efivars backend handle "unlink(2)" in the pstore file system. pstore will call the backend->erase function passing the "id". The backend should then erase the right record from persistent storage. With the ((timestamp * 100 + part) * 100 + count function - you can easily reverse it to find timestamp, part and count - would that make life easier for the backend to find the record to be erased? If you use a hash function you will need to check each record and compute the hash to see if it matches (probably not a big deal because the backend will generally only hold a handful of records). -Tony -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists