linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] random: remove batched entropy locking

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 28 Jan 2022 16:54:06 +0100
From:   "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
To:     Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
        Jonathan Neuschäfer <j.neuschaefer@....net>,
        "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] random: remove batched entropy locking

Hi Sebastian,

On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 4:44 PM Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
<bigeasy@...utronix.de> wrote:
> NO. Could we please look at my RANDOM patches first?
> I can repost my rebased patched if there no objection.

I did, and my reply is here:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAHmME9pzdXyD0oRYyCoVUSqqsA9h03-oR7kcNhJuPEcEMTJYgw@mail.gmail.com/

I was hoping for a series that addresses these issues. As I mentioned
before, I'm not super keen on deferring that processing in a
conditional case and having multiple entry ways into that same
functionality. I don't think that's worth it, especially if your
actual concern is just userspace calling RNDADDTOENTCNT too often
(which can be safely ratelimited). I don't think that thread needs to
spill over here, though, so feel free to follow up with a v+1 on that
series and I'll happily take a look. Alternatively, if you'd like to
approach this by providing a patch for Jonathan's issue, that makes
sense too. So far, the things in front of me are: 1) your patchset
from last month that has unresolved issues, and 2) Andy's thing, which
maybe will solve the problem (or it won't?). A third alternative from
you would be most welcome too.

Jason