[lkml]   [2003]   [Aug]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH] Make cryptoapi non-optional?
Andrew Morton wrote:
> Matt Mackall <> wrote:
> > I'm pretty sure there was never a time when entropy
> > accounting wasn't racy let alone wrong, SMP or no (fixed in -mm, thank
> > you).
> Well is has been argued that the lack of locking in the random driver is a
> "feature", adding a little more unpredictability.

Dodgy. Does lack of locking mean users can trick /dev/random into
thinking it has more entropy than it does? Or let them detect the
time when /dev/random gains entropy, without reading it?

> Now I don't know if that makes sense or not, but the locking certainly has
> a cost. If it doesn't actually fix anything then that cost becomes a
> waste.

Per-cpu random pools, perhaps :)

-- Jamie
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:47    [W:0.186 / U:1.088 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site