linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH, RFC] random: introduce getrandom(2) system call

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20140717213906.GD24196@lenny.home.zabbo.net>
Date:	Thu, 17 Jul 2014 14:39:06 -0700
From:	Zach Brown <zab@...bo.net>
To:	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-api@...r.kernel.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
	beck@...nbsd.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] random: introduce getrandom(2) system call

On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 04:54:17PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 12:48:12PM -0700, Zach Brown wrote:
> > 
> > > +	return urandom_read(NULL, buf, count, NULL);
> > 
> > I wonder if we want to refactor the entry points a bit more instead of
> > directly calling the device read functions.
> 
> I could refactor the entropy point, but it probably wouldn't add any
> extra bloat, since the compiler would hopefully compile it away, but
> adding the extra static function would seem to make things less
> readable at least in my opinion.

Fair enough, I don't have a strong preference either way.  It was just
something I noticed when leafing through the (unfamiliar) code.

- z
--
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/