Phil Sutter <phil@xxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 01, 2022 at 11:13:17AM +0100, Florian Westphal wrote: > > Use meta random and bitops to replicate what xt_statistics > > is doing. > > I didn't know about 'meta random', even though it's a bit older than > numgen. What's the difference to 'numgen random'? META_RANDOM is simpler. its really just setting a 32bit register to a 32bit random value. No modulus, offset or anything like that is supported. For most users, numgen random is much better because you can generate a random number within a given range. But this translation really does match exactly what xt_statistics is doing. > I'm asking because I > once tried to fix the same issue using the latter[1], it was never > applied, though. > > Maybe you could reuse gcd_div() from my patch to reduce nominal values? Why? If you prefer numgen, maybe just rebase your patch and push it out?
