[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140811071527.GB4184@grmbl.mre>
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 12:45:27 +0530
From: Amit Shah <amit.shah@...hat.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: jgarzik@...pay.com,
Virtualization List <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Amos Kong <akong@...hat.com>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@...ux.intel.com>,
duwe@....de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] rngd: add udev rule to source from hwrng if
virtio-rng present
On (Fri) 08 Aug 2014 [14:46:27], H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 08/08/2014 02:07 AM, Amit Shah wrote:
> >
> >
> >> To
> >> some degree the above is obsolete when we get khwrngd widely deployed,
> >> but that is a new-kernel-only kind of thing.
> >
> > Right - I'm wondering if any such changes as propsed here are now
> > obsolted already by khwrngd?
> >
>
> In this case, yes, khwrngd would be a better solution for current kernels.
I think that's OK with me.
What's the suggested value for rng->quality, though, for virtio-rng
that I can use to ensure the kthread starts?
Should I use the 700 (70%) as proposed in the original patchset? I'm
not exactly sure how that value will be used as well..
Amit
--
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