[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHmME9q1wD7EBQPBaR1mBu5ZN+fSpe8yPMWTd7H20+sYEzy8cw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2022 21:00:06 +0200
From: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Crypto Mailing List <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>,
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 <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
linux-m68k <linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org>,
"open list:BROADCOM NVRAM DRIVER" <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 v5 07/11] x86: use fallback for random_get_entropy()
instead of zero
Hi Borislav,
On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 8:59 PM Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 08:38:41PM +0200, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> > I think I prefer doing (a), and leaving (b) for another time when you
> > or another x86 maintainer can do so. But I'll do whichever you say.
> > Which would you like?
>
> We are switching all feature checks to cpu_feature_enabled() so you
> might as well do the new preferred way of checking when adding a
> new function and so that we have one less place to touch. Which is
> appreciated. :)
Okay, no problem. I'll make the change there and get_cycles() for v+1
of the patchset.
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists