| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20090513142535.GB31071@waste.org> Date: Wed, 13 May 2009 09:25:38 -0500 From: Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com> To: Chris Peterson <cpeterso@...terso.com> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] [resend] drivers/net: remove network drivers' last few uses of IRQF_SAMPLE_RANDOM On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 12:17:29AM -0700, Chris Peterson wrote: > > The future model will continue to sample network > > devices on theory that they -might- be less than 100% observable and > > that can only increase our total (unmeasurable) amount of entropy. > > That sounds reasonable to me. So should all net drivers now specify > IRQF_SAMPLE_RANDOM? > > Or even simpler: could request_irq() assume IRQF_SAMPLE_RANDOM for any > interrupt that is not (say) IRQF_IRQPOLL or IRQF_PERCPU? Maybe. We don't want IRQ latency to suffer. So before we turn on sampling of -all- sources, we need to make sampling lighter weight and we need a way to say 'we have enough' so that we're not consuming CPU when our pools are 'full'. We could turn it on now and rely on the current trickle logic, but it's nice to have the water main off when doing significant plumbing. -- Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time. -- 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