[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4074127.U4nTXhg6YI@tauon.chronox.de>
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2017 17:17:05 +0200
From: Stephan Müller <smueller@...onox.de>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"Jason A. Donenfeld" <jason@...c4.com>,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v12 3/4] Linux Random Number Generator
Am Freitag, 21. Juli 2017, 17:09:11 CEST schrieb Arnd Bergmann:
Hi Arnd,
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Stephan Müller <smueller@...onox.de>
wrote:
> > Am Freitag, 21. Juli 2017, 05:08:47 CEST schrieb Theodore Ts'o:
> >> Um, the timer is the largest number of interrupts on my system. Compare:
> >> CPU0 CPU1 CPU2 CPU3
> >>
> >> LOC: 6396552 6038865 6558646 6057102 Local timer
> >> interrupts
> >>
> >> with the number of disk related interrupts:
> >> 120: 21492 139284 40513 1705886 PCI-MSI 376832-edge
> >>
> >> ahci[0000:00:17.0]
> >
> > They seem to be not picked up with the add_interrupt_randomness function.
>
> On x86, the local APIC timer has some special handling in
> arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S that does not go through handle_irq_event().
>
> I would assume that this is different when you boot with the "noapictimer"
> option and use the hpet clockevent instead.
>
> On other architectures, the timer interrupt is often handled as a regular
> IRQ as well.
Thank you for the hint.
Yet, I would think that timer interrupts can be identified by
add_interrupt_randomness, either by the IRQ or the stuck test that was is
suggested with the LRNG patch set.
Ciao
Stephan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists