[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1405594627.12194.9.camel@localhost>
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 12:57:07 +0200
From: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-abi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, beck@...nbsd.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] random: introduce getrandom(2) system call
On Do, 2014-07-17 at 05:18 -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> SYNOPSIS
> #include <linux/random.h>
>
> int getrandom(void *buf, size_t buflen, unsigned int flags);
Cool, I think the interface is sane.
Btw. couldn't libressl etc. fall back to binary_sysctl
kernel.random.uuid and seed with that as a last resort? We have it
available for few more years.
> +SYSCALL_DEFINE3(getrandom, char __user *, buf, size_t, count,
> + unsigned int, flags)
> +{
> + int r;
> +
> + if (count > 256)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
Why this "arbitrary" limitation? Couldn't we just check for > SSIZE_MAX
or to be more conservative to INT_MAX?
> + if (flags & GRND_RANDOM) {
> + return _random_read(!(flags & GRND_BLOCK), buf, count);
> + }
> + if (flags & GRND_BLOCK) {
> + r = wait_for_completion_interruptible(&urandom_initialized);
> + if (r)
> + return r;
> + } else if (!completion_done(&urandom_initialized))
> + return -EAGAIN;
> + return urandom_read(NULL, buf, count, NULL);
> +}
> +
Great, thanks Ted,
Hannes
--
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