Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 00:17:18 +0100
From: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <>
To: Tom Herbert <>
Cc: Netdev <>,, 
	LKML <>, 
	Linux Crypto Mailing List <>, 
	Jean-Philippe Aumasson <>, "Daniel J . Bernstein" <>, 
	Linus Torvalds <>, Eric Biggers <>, 
	David Laight <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] siphash: add cryptographically secure hashtable function

Hey Tom,

On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 12:14 AM, Tom Herbert <> wrote:
> I'm confused, doesn't 2dword == 1qword? Anyway, I think the qword
> functions are good enough. If someone needs to hash over some odd
> length they can either put them in a structure padded to 64 bits or
> call the hash function that takes a byte length.

Yes. Here's an example:

static inline u64 siphash24_2dwords(const u32 a, const u32 b, const u8
       return siphash24_1qword(((u64)b << 32) | a, key);

This winds up being extremely useful and syntactically convenient in a
few places. Check out my git branch in about 10 minutes or wait for v4
to be posted tomorrow; these are nice helpers.

> I'd still drop the "24" unless you really think we're going to have
> multiple variants coming into the kernel.

Okay. I don't have a problem with this, unless anybody has some reason
to the contrary.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.