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  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]
Date:	Tue, 12 Aug 2014 11:01:58 +0530
From:	Amit Shah <>
To:	Greg KH <>
Cc:, Amos Kong <>,
	Virtualization List <>,, Rusty Russell <>
Subject: Re: [3.16 stable PATCH 1/1] virtio-rng: fix multi-device startup

On (Tue) 12 Aug 2014 [06:55:27], Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 06:11:47PM +0530, Amit Shah wrote:
> > This is a 3.16-only patch.  The linux.git fix is
> > 5c06273401f2eb7b290cadbae18ee00f8f65e893, which fixes this issue in a
> > different way.
> Why "different"?  Why can't I take that original patch instead?  What is
> different in this patch, and why?

The commit referenced moves the hwrng_register() call to the ->scan()
callback instead of it being in probe().  This was done to ensure the
virtio-rng devices can contribute to the initial system entropy
introduced in commit d9e7972619334.

That patch is quite small too, but will need a slight conflict
resolution due to the previous two code-shuffling patches, and also
the following revert.

However, I decided against the backport of the ->scan() method, since
it wasn't designed to solve this regression, it happens to solve it,
and it actually introduces new functionality.  I would be happy to
provide a backport of the relevant patches, if you think that would be


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists