Benjamin Kaduk <bka...@akamai.com> skrev: (10 januari 2017 18:48:32 CET) >On 01/09/2017 10:05 PM, Salz, Rich wrote: >> >> Should we move to using SIPHash for the default string hashing >> function in OpenSSL? It’s now in the kernel >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/1/9/619 >> ><https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lkml.org_lkml_2017_1_9_619&d=DwMFAg&c=96ZbZZcaMF4w0F4jpN6LZg&r=sssDLkeEEBWNIXmTsdpw8TZ3tAJx-Job4p1unc7rOhM&m=pP5nqGH-O2jy9bgGMmoCbXCc1O46ngqbhe5RSSkFBe8&s=pUULb5vMnjiMFb0kcqwJSHvwKh1G0vQZXwDDYnXNCA8&e=> >> >> Overview at https://131002.net/siphash/ >> ><https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__131002.net_siphash_&d=DwMFAg&c=96ZbZZcaMF4w0F4jpN6LZg&r=sssDLkeEEBWNIXmTsdpw8TZ3tAJx-Job4p1unc7rOhM&m=pP5nqGH-O2jy9bgGMmoCbXCc1O46ngqbhe5RSSkFBe8&s=7y76cbQkDMaUqyjBZmNMndmATnk9tUPu8I8JxeD1bKE&e=> >> >> > >Instead of this? > >%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% > >/*- > unsigned char b[16]; > MD5(c,strlen(c),b); > return(b[0]|(b[1]<<8)|(b[2]<<16)|(b[3]<<24)); >*/ > > n = 0x100; > while (*c) { > v = n | (*c); > n += 0x100; > r = (int)((v >> 2) ^ v) & 0x0f; > ret = (ret << r) | (ret >> (32 - r)); > ret &= 0xFFFFFFFFL; > ret ^= v * v; > c++; > } > return ((ret >> 16) ^ ret); > >%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% > >Heck, yes! > >-Ben
I fail to see what that would give us. OPENSSL_LH_strhash() is used to get a reasonable index for LHASH entries. Also SIPhash gives at least 64 bits results, do we really expect to see large enough hash tables to warrant that? Cheers Richard -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- openssl-dev mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev