Re: [PATCH v6 1/5] random: Blocking API for accessing nonblocking_pool

[Stephan Mueller]

Am Dienstag, 19. Mai 2015, 22:18:05 schrieb Herbert Xu:

Hi Herbert,

>On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 09:50:28AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>> Finally, this is only going to block *once*, when the system is
>> initially botting up.  Why is it so important that we get the
>> asynchronous nature of this right, and why can't we solve it simply by
>> just simply doing the work in a workqueue, with a completion barrier
>> getting triggered once /dev/random initializes itself, and just simply
>> blocking the module unload until /dev/random is initialized?
>
>I guess I'm still thinking of the old work queue code before
>Tejun's cmwq work.  Yes blocking in a work queue should be fine
>as there is usually just one DRBG instance.

The current modification with patch 1 to random.c is the smallest change to 
date. Is that then appropriate?

Herbert, based on your comment now, would the currently discussed patch with 
waiting in the work queue in patch 3 appropriate? Or what would you like to 
see changed?

Ciao
Stephan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/