-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Davide Libenzi wrote: > Randomizing the base is not a problem. Should this be always, or flag > driven? I would say all the time. I don't think it's a problem with reproducibility in any reasonable code. - -- ➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, CA ❖ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFGY0oq2ijCOnn/RHQRArmJAJ99Q0dLsPcnQQHjmSpLgv8va/F8/wCgyF06 57LVbqftsMC9x0/CzjWTgkw= =WXM6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [patch 2/2] ufd v1 - use unsequential O(1) fdmap
- From: Davide Libenzi <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch 2/2] ufd v1 - use unsequential O(1) fdmap
- References:
- [patch 2/2] ufd v1 - use unsequential O(1) fdmap
- From: Davide Libenzi <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch 2/2] ufd v1 - use unsequential O(1) fdmap
- From: Ulrich Drepper <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch 2/2] ufd v1 - use unsequential O(1) fdmap
- From: Davide Libenzi <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch 2/2] ufd v1 - use unsequential O(1) fdmap
- From: Ulrich Drepper <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch 2/2] ufd v1 - use unsequential O(1) fdmap
- From: Davide Libenzi <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch 2/2] ufd v1 - use unsequential O(1) fdmap
- From: Ulrich Drepper <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch 2/2] ufd v1 - use unsequential O(1) fdmap
- From: Davide Libenzi <[email protected]>
- [patch 2/2] ufd v1 - use unsequential O(1) fdmap
- Prev by Date: Re: [patch 2/2] ufd v1 - use unsequential O(1) fdmap
- Next by Date: Re: 2.6.22-rc: regression: no irda0 interface (2.6.21 was OK), smsc does not find chip
- Previous by thread: Re: [patch 2/2] ufd v1 - use unsequential O(1) fdmap
- Next by thread: Re: [patch 2/2] ufd v1 - use unsequential O(1) fdmap
- Index(es):
 |