[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200328173712.GB5859@SDF.ORG>
Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2020 17:37:12 +0000
From: George Spelvin <lkml@....ORG>
To: Maciej Zenczykowski <maze@...gle.com>
Cc: Kernel hackers <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
Linux NetDev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, lkml@....org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 18/50] net/ipv6/addrconf.c: Use prandom_u32_max
for rfc3315 backoff time computation
On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 09:56:58AM -0700, Maciej ?enczykowski wrote:
>> /* multiply 'initial retransmission time' by 0.9 .. 1.1 */
>> - u64 tmp = (900000 + prandom_u32() % 200001) * (u64)irt;
>> - do_div(tmp, 1000000);
>> - return (s32)tmp;
>> + s32 range = irt / 5;
>> + return irt - (s32)(range/2) + (s32)prandom_u32_max(range);
>
> The cast on range/2 looks entirely spurious
You're absolutely right; sorry about that. I was trying to
preserve the previous code's mixture of signed and unsigned types
and managed to confuse myself.
(I think I got distracted researching whether the inputs could be
negative.)
>> /* multiply 'retransmission timeout' by 1.9 .. 2.1 */
>> - u64 tmp = (1900000 + prandom_u32() % 200001) * (u64)rt;
>> - do_div(tmp, 1000000);
>> - if ((s32)tmp > mrt) {
>> + s32 range = rt / 5;
>> + s32 tmp = 2*rt - (s32)(ran..ge/2) + (s32)prandom_u32_max(range);
>
> Here as well. Honestly the cast on prandom might also not be
> necessary, but that at least has a reason.
The whole thing should go. How about just doing it all in unsigned:
static inline s32 rfc3315_s14_backoff_init(s32 irt)
{
/* multiply 'initial retransmission time' by 0.9 .. 1.1 */
u32 range = irt / 5u;
return irt - range/2 + prandom_u32_max(range);
}
static inline s32 rfc3315_s14_backoff_update(s32 rt, s32 mrt)
{
/* multiply 'retransmission timeout' by 1.9 .. 2.1 */
u32 range = rt / 5u;
u32 tmp = 2u*rt - range/2 + prandom_u32_max(range);
if (tmp > mrt) {
/* multiply 'maximum retransmission time' by 0.9 .. 1.1 */
range = mrt / 5u;
tmp = mrt - range/2 + prandom_u32_max(range);
}
return tmp;
}
That lets "range/2" be implemented as a 1-bit shift.
An interesting question for the latter is whether
"prandom_u32_max(range) - range/2" can be considered a common
subexpression, or is they have to be *independent* random values.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists