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 00:34:30 +0100
From: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <>
To: Linus Torvalds <>
Cc: Tom Herbert <>, Netdev <>, 
	"" <>, LKML <>, 
	Linux Crypto Mailing List <>, 
	Jean-Philippe Aumasson <>, "Daniel J . Bernstein" <>, 
	Eric Biggers <>, David Laight <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] siphash: add cryptographically secure hashtable function

Hey Linus,

On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 12:30 AM, Linus Torvalds
<> wrote:
> No. The bug is talking about "words" in the first place.
> Depending on your background, a "word" can be generally be either 16
> bits or 32 bits (or, in some cases, 18 bits).
> In theory, a 64-bit entity can be a "word" too, but pretty much nobody
> uses that. Even architectures that started out with a 64-bit register
> size and never had any smaller historical baggage (eg alpha) tend to
> call 32-bit entities "words".
> So 16 bits can be a word, but some people/architectures will call it a
> "half-word".
> To make matters even more confusing, a "quadword" is generally always
> 64 bits, regardless of the size of "word".
> So please try to avoid the use of "word" entirely. It's too ambiguous,
> and it's not even helpful as a "size of the native register". It's
> almost purely random.
> For the kernel, we tend use
>  - uX for types that have specific sizes (X being the number of bits)
>  - "[unsigned] long" for native register size
> But never "word".

The voice of reason. Have a desired name for this function family?


Or does your reasonable dislike of "word" still allow for the use of
dword and qword, so that the current function names of:


are okay?


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.