[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAL_JsqJ86vZKZQO+9_Kva-EbZrRPMbcgDm+UvjJdnR=GL-qHSw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2022 09:40:13 -0500
From: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:HARDWARE RANDOM NUMBER GENERATOR CORE"
<linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
Anton Ivanov <anton.ivanov@...bridgegreys.com>,
Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Chris Zankel <chris@...kel.net>,
Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@...il.com>,
John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@...nel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org,
"open list:MIPS" <linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-riscv <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
sparclinux <sparclinux@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-um@...ts.infradead.org, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
linux-xtensa@...ux-xtensa.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 03/11] riscv: use fallback for random_get_entropy()
instead of zero
On Wed, Apr 13, 2022 at 6:56 AM Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@...c4.com> wrote:
>
> In the event that random_get_entropy() can't access a cycle counter or
> similar, falling back to returning 0 is really not the best we can do.
> Instead, at least calling random_get_entropy_fallback() would be
> preferable, because that always needs to return _something_, even
> falling back to jiffies eventually. It's not as though
> random_get_entropy_fallback() is super high precision or guaranteed to
> be entropic, but basically anything that's not zero all the time is
> better than returning zero all the time.
>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> Cc: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>
> Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@...c4.com>
> ---
> arch/riscv/include/asm/timex.h | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/timex.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/timex.h
> index 507cae273bc6..d6a7428f6248 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/timex.h
> +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/timex.h
> @@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ static inline u32 get_cycles_hi(void)
> static inline unsigned long random_get_entropy(void)
> {
> if (unlikely(clint_time_val == NULL))
Moving this check to get_cycles() implementation would eliminate the
RiscV implementation of random_get_entropy() if you follow my other
suggestion.
I guess there's some advantage to skipping a NULL check every time for
get_cycles(), but really the register read time will be much slower
than an added check.
> - return 0;
> + return random_get_entropy_fallback();
> return get_cycles();
> }
> #define random_get_entropy() random_get_entropy()
Powered by blists - more mailing lists