Re: [PATCH v7 15/16] openvswitch: use new hashtable implementation

[Mathieu Desnoyers]

* Tejun Heo (tj@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 02:16:48PM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > This is just one example in an attempt to show why different hash table
> > users may have different constraints: for a hash table entirely
> > populated by keys generated internally by the kernel, a random seed
> > might not be required, but for cases where values are fed by user-space
> > and from the NIC, I would argue that flexibility to implement a
> > randomizable hash function beats implementation simplicity any time.
> > 
> > And you could keep the basic use-case simple by providing hints to the
> > hash_32()/hash_64()/hash_ulong() helpers in comments.
> 
> If all you need is throwing in a salt value to avoid attacks, can't
> you just do that from caller side?  Scrambling the key before feeding
> it into hash_*() should work, no?

Yes, I think salting the "key" parameter would work.

Thanks,

Mathieu

> 
> Thanks.
> 
> -- 
> tejun

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/