[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120705181956.GA16846@kroah.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2012 11:19:56 -0700
From: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
Cc: Linux Kernel Developers List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, w@....eu, ewust@...ch.edu,
zakir@...ch.edu, mpm@...enic.com, nadiah@...ucsd.edu,
jhalderm@...ch.edu, tglx@...utronix.de, davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/10] random: use lockless techniques when mixing
entropy pools
On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 02:12:05PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> The real-time Linux folks didn't like add_interrupt_randomness()
> taking a spinlock since it is called in the low-level interrupt
> routine. Using atomic_t's and cmpxchg is also too expensive on some
> of the older architectures. So we'll bite the bullet and use
> ACCESS_ONCE() and smp_rmb()/smp_wmb() to minimize the race windows
> when mixing in the entropy pool.
>
> Also, we will use a trylock when trying to increase then entropy
> accounting during the interrupt path to avoid taking a spinlock there;
> if there is contention, we will simply not credit the entropy count,
> thus failing safe. Thanks to Dan Carpenter for suggesting this
> approach.
>
> Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
> ---
Any reason you don't want this backported to the -stable series?
--
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