linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] liblockdep for 4.12

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: <20170508061845.rhoq73yentafplwv@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 8 May 2017 08:18:45 +0200
From:   Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:     alexander.levin@...izon.com
Cc:     "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "ben@...adent.org.uk" <ben@...adent.org.uk>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] liblockdep for 4.12


* alexander.levin@...izon.com <alexander.levin@...izon.com> wrote:

> On Fri, May 05, 2017 at 08:11:38AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * alexander.levin@...izon.com <alexander.levin@...izon.com> wrote:
> > Could you please include all the patches as part of the pull request, so that 
> > individual patches can be discussed?
> 
> Sure, I'll resend.
>  
> > In particular I'm wondering about:
> > 
> > >  tools/include/linux/jhash.h                    | 125 +++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 
> > include/linux/jhash.h is 175 lines long - why not make an exact copy and keep it 
> > synchronized the way perf does it?
> 
> Including jhash() vs only jhash2() required pulling additional headers in.
> Since we don't need jhash() I preferred to drop it.
> 
> Let me know if you'd prefer to do it the other way and include everything.

How many headers would that be? We already have tools/include/../bitops.h, so we'd 
only need include/linux/unaligned/packed_struct.h, which looks straightforward and 
smallish.

( That header includes kernel.h, but we have that in tools as well, so in theory 
  it could work. )

The principle would be to 'COW-share' as much code as possible, at least for 
obvious arithmetics helpers - which hashes do appear to be.

Thanks,

	Ingo