[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5362D20F.6010401@zytor.com>
Date: Thu, 01 May 2014 16:00:31 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
CC: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kvm list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
Kees Cook <kees@...flux.net>
Subject: Re: random: Providing a seed value to VM guests
On 05/01/2014 03:56 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
> I think we're comparing:
>
> a) cpuid to detect rdrand *or* emulated rdrand followed by rdrand
>
> to
>
> b) cpuid to detect rdrand or the paravirt seed msr/cpuid call,
> followed by rdrand or the msr or cpuid read
>
> this seems like it barely makes a difference, especially since (a)
> probably requires detecting KVM anyway.
Well, it lets one do something like:
if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_RDRAND) ||
boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_RDRAND_SIMULATED))
rdrand_long(...);
We need the ifs anyway for early code; the arch_*() interfaces are only
available after alternatives run.
-hpa
--
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