From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753958AbXJGODO (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Oct 2007 10:03:14 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752347AbXJGOC7 (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Oct 2007 10:02:59 -0400 Received: from turing-police.cc.vt.edu ([128.173.14.107]:39164 "EHLO turing-police.cc.vt.edu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752282AbXJGOC7 (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Oct 2007 10:02:59 -0400 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.2 01/07/2005 with nmh-1.2 To: Helge Deller Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Time-based RFC 4122 UUID generator In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 07 Oct 2007 12:08:10 +0200." <200710071208.11030.deller@gmx.de> From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu References: <200710061553.37311.deller@gmx.de> <20668.1191728530@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> <200710071208.11030.deller@gmx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="==_Exmh_1191765776_10413P"; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 07 Oct 2007 10:02:56 -0400 Message-ID: <2018.1191765776@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --==_Exmh_1191765776_10413P Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Sun, 07 Oct 2007 12:08:10 +0200, you said: > Thanks that you ask! > I really should have mentioned it in my initial posting. > > Yes, this change was intentional, as it in fact fixes a possible bug in the original code. > Section 4.1.6 in RFC 4122 states regarding the "NodeID": > : For systems with no IEEE address, a randomly or pseudo-randomly > : generated value may be used; see Section 4.5. The multicast bit must > : be set in such addresses, in order that they will never conflict with > : addresses obtained from network cards. > > So up to now it was just pure ("random") luck if this bit was set or not. Sounds like a valid bugfix then - but it should probably be sent upstream separately, with it's own changelog (what I quoted above should be fine)... Remember - one patch, one logical change, so your patch should be split up (among other things, that way the bugfix can proceed even if the new-function part gets hung up in review)..... Other than splitting it up, I have no further comments on either part.. Enjoy... --==_Exmh_1191765776_10413P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 iD8DBQFHCOcQcC3lWbTT17ARAlPkAKDuGvbOuqi5HU4Tlaeb4nEamjG4mQCeNXH+ 5/GyopvmiWlYgrNiGoTFVgg= =FAFY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --==_Exmh_1191765776_10413P--