On Sun, Jun 24, 2007 at 07:45:04PM +0200, Alexander Gabert wrote: > Hi Linus, > hi LKML, > > i would like to thank LKML and especially Eric (thanks for the per_cpu > macro tips and design guidelines!) and the other contributors to this idea. > > This time the patch is rather big because it also removes > get_random_int() and introduces get_random_long() throughout the kernel.
Stop right there. You still haven't answered my original question. What is the point of this exercise in the first place, please? Am I right in thinking you have three unrelated patches here? - something to do with aux vector headers - something to do with get_random_int repeating itself - sweeping change of get_random_int to get_random_long for no obvious reason These should be three completely separate patches. > My findings with get_random_int was that when i called it two times very > fast after another because of setting up two SSP randomized guard values > for the same process, it returned the same, yet randomized, integer number. Send me a patch that fixes the above and nothing else, please. Then we can talk about another patch to change things to get_random_long. > --- linux-2.6.21.5.ORIG/arch/sparc64/kernel/sys_sparc.c 2007-06-11 > 20:37:06.000000000 +0200 > +++ linux-2.6.21.5/arch/sparc64/kernel/sys_sparc.c 2007-06-24 > 19:01:44.000000000 +0200 > @@ -362,7 +362,7 @@ > unsigned long random_factor = 0UL; > > if (current->flags & PF_RANDOMIZE) { > - random_factor = get_random_int(); > + random_factor = get_random_long(); This probably breaks Sparc64. -- Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/