[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4842429.MGkO9sKMeG@positron.chronox.de>
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2016 10:22:28 +0200
From: Stephan Mueller <smueller@...onox.de>
To: Sandy Harris <sandyinchina@...il.com>
Cc: David Jaša <djasa@...hat.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Jason Cooper <cryptography@...edaemon.net>,
John Denker <jsd@...n.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>,
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
George Spelvin <linux@...izon.com>,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/5] /dev/random - a new approach
Am Freitag, 17. Juni 2016, 11:26:23 schrieb Sandy Harris:
Hi Sandy,
> David Jaša <djasa@...hat.com> wrote:
> > BTW when looking at an old BSI's issue with Linux urandom that Jarod
> > Wilson tried to solve with this series:
> > https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-crypto/msg06113.html
> > I was thinking:
> > 1) wouldn't it help for large urandom consumers if kernel created a DRBG
> > instance for each of them? It would likely enhance performance and solve
> > BSI's concern of predicting what numbers could other urandom consumers
> > obtain at cost of memory footprint
> > and then, after reading paper associated with this series:
> > 2) did you evaluate use of intermediate DRBG fed by primary generator to
> > instantiate per-node DRBG's? It would allow initialization of all
> > secondary DRBGs right after primary generator initialization.
>
> Theodore Ts'o, the random maintainer, already has a patch that
> seems to deal with this issue. He has posted more than one
> version & I'm not sure this is the best or latest, but ...
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/5/30/22
His latest patch set that he mentioned to appear in 4.8 covers a per-NUMA DRNG
where there is a "primary" /dev/urandom DRNG where secondary DRNGs for the
NUMA nodes are spawned from.
Ciao
Stephan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists