netdev - Re: [patch net-next 5/8] Introduce sample tc action

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: <5825DB2F.1090208@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 11 Nov 2016 06:52:31 -0800
From:   John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
To:     Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com>,
        Yotam Gigi <yotamg@...lanox.com>
Cc:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>,
        Elad Raz <eladr@...lanox.com>,
        Nogah Frankel <nogahf@...lanox.com>,
        Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
        "jhs@...atatu.com" <jhs@...atatu.com>,
        "geert+renesas@...der.be" <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
        "stephen@...workplumber.org" <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
        "xiyou.wangcong@...il.com" <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        "linux@...ck-us.net" <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        "roopa@...ulusnetworks.com" <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>
Subject: Re: [patch net-next 5/8] Introduce sample tc action

On 16-11-11 04:43 AM, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 08:28:50AM +0000, Yotam Gigi wrote:
> 
> ...
> 
>> John, as a result of your question I realized that our hardware does do
>> randomized sampling that I was not aware of. I will use the extensibility of
>> the API and implement a random keyword, that will be offloaded in our
>> hardware. Those changes will be sent on v2.
>>
>> Eventually, your question was very relevant :) Thanks!
> 
> Perhaps I am missing the point but why not just make random the default and
> implement the inverse as an extension if it turns out to be needed in
> future?
> 

+1 just implement the random one.

.John