[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <482DB568.1040704@firstfloor.org>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 18:25:12 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
CC: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
Chris Peterson <cpeterso@...terso.com>,
tpmdd-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, tpm@...horst.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: [PATCH] drivers/net: remove network drivers' last
few uses of IRQF_SAMPLE_RANDOM
Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 12:19:49PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> Just think a little bit: system has no randomness source except the
>> hardware RNG. you do your strange randomness verification. if it fails
>> what do you do? You don't feed anything into your entropy pool and all
>> your random output is predictable (just boot time) If you add anything
>> predictable from another source it's still predictable, no difference.
>
> You can continue to feed data into the pool even if it fails the
> test. You just keep the entropy value same as before.
You could do that, but what advantage would it have? I don't think it's
worth running the FIPS test, or rather requiring the user land daemon
and leaving behind most of the userbase just for this.
-Andi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists