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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2022 18:28:52 +0100 From: Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net> To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tytso@....edu Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] random: remove unused reserved argument Am Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 05:22:32PM +0100 schrieb Jason A. Donenfeld: > On Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 2:45 PM Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net> wrote: > > > @@ -1342,7 +1341,7 @@ static size_t account(struct entropy_store *r, size_t nbytes, int min, > > > /* never pull more than available */ > > > have_bytes = entropy_count >> (ENTROPY_SHIFT + 3); > > > > > > - if ((have_bytes -= reserved) < 0) > > > + if (have_bytes < 0) > > > have_bytes = 0; > > > ibytes = min_t(size_t, ibytes, have_bytes); > > > > Hmm. We already WARN_ON(entropy_count < 0) a few lines below. Maybe move > > that assertion before the assignement of have_bytes? Then, have_bytes can > > never be lower than zero, and the code becomes even simpler. What do you > > think? > > Can you send a separate patch for this that we can apply on top? It > seems reasonable anyhow. Something like: As you've written that patch yourself now, just take that, and feel free to add my Reviewed-by tag. Thanks, Dominik
Powered by blists - more mailing lists