netdev - Re: [PATCH] Stochastic Fair Blue queue discipline

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: <47FD6C0E.7040808@trash.net>
Date:	Thu, 10 Apr 2008 03:23:26 +0200
From:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
CC:	Juliusz Chroboczek <Juliusz.Chroboczek@....jussieu.fr>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Stochastic Fair Blue queue discipline

Andi Kleen wrote:
>> Random32 is initialised from get_random_bytes; so the per-cpu
>> pseudo-random sequences should be uncorrelated.  I fail to see how an
>> arbitrary interleaving of uncorrelated good pseudo-random sequences
>> can fail to be good.
> 
> They are not necessarily uncorreleated, especially on platforms
> which do have poor entropy support and when your initialization happens
> at boot time. Take a look at how the random pool starts in random.c.
> 
>> Looking at line 448 of sch_sfq.c in Linus' current HEAD, I see that
>> somebody else thinks the same as I do.  So please let me know if sfq
>> needs fixed, or whether I can use net_random in sfb.
> 
> A lot of people get this wrong, but this doesn't mean that the
> problem should be readded in new code again.


Well, if I'm not mistaken net_random() used to be a function
(in net/core/utils.c) that didn't have this problem. So these
problems seem to have been introduced by the conversion to
srandom().

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html