Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 23:06:24 -0700 (PDT) From: Don Lewis <dl-freebsd@catspoiler.org> To: nate@root.org Cc: julian@elischer.org, tlambert2@mindspring.com, sam@errno.com, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: CFR: m_tag patch Message-ID: <200210080606.g9866OvU034411@gw.catspoiler.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0210072203180.9216-100000@root.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 7 Oct, Nate Lawson wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, Julian Elischer wrote:
>> it is just working on the principal that there is not going to be
>> a collision in the 32 bit space. Especially when we create them from
>> "time since the epoch", and when teh various authors can see each
>> other's choices of value.
>
> There are deterministic ways to generate them.
> 1. A counter -- gettag() { return tag++; }
> 2. A LCRG -- gettag() { return (A * tag) % n; }
> 3. A global registry -- "Hey, gimme a major"
>
> There are non-deterministic ways as well, i.e. hash functions and
> PRNGs. And if code can run faster than a given time source, the output of
> that source or permutation thereof can produce collisions.
>
> What leads you towards the time-based option vs. the others, especially
> the deterministic ones?
Why not name them? At boot or module load time stuff the name in a
table and use the table index as the 16 bit ID. Is there any reason the
ID has to be the same each time the system is booted?
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200210080606.g9866OvU034411>