[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Yl78gLLcSb3EHv0B@zn.tnic>
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2022 20:16:32 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
tglx@...utronix.de, 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>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Chris Zankel <chris@...kel.net>,
Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@...il.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@...nel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org,
linux-um@...ts.infradead.org, x86@...nel.org,
linux-xtensa@...ux-xtensa.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 07/11] x86: use fallback for random_get_entropy()
instead of zero
On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 01:16:46PM +0200, Jason A. Donenfeld 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.
>
> If CONFIG_X86_TSC=n, then it's possible that we're running on a 486 with
> no RDTSC, so we only need the fallback code for that case.
>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> Cc: x86@...nel.org
> Signed-off-by: Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@...c4.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/include/asm/timex.h | 10 ++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/timex.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/timex.h
> index a4a8b1b16c0c..fac180359693 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/timex.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/timex.h
> @@ -5,6 +5,16 @@
> #include <asm/processor.h>
> #include <asm/tsc.h>
>
> +static inline unsigned long random_get_entropy(void)
> +{
> +#ifndef CONFIG_X86_TSC
> + if (!boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_TSC))
cpu_feature_enabled() pls.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists