On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 11:14:12AM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Tue, 2016-03-29 at 09:16 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: > > Looks like rhashtable has too much policy in it to properly deal with > > cases where there are too many hash collisions, so I am going to work > > on reverting it's use in mac80211. > > I'm not really all that happy with that approach - can't we fix the > rhashtable? It's a pretty rare corner case that many keys really are > identical and no kind of hash algorithm, but it seems much better to > still deal with it than to remove the rhashtable usage and go back to > hand-rolling something. Well to start with you should assess whether you really want to hash multiple objects with the same key. In particular, can an adversary generate a large number of such objects? If your conclusion is that yes you really want to do this, then we have the parameter insecure_elasticity that you can use to disable the rehashing based on chain length. Cheers, -- Email: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
