Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 16:01:07 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: Mark R V Murray <mark@grondar.org> Cc: Tim Kientzle <tim@kientzle.com>, =?iso-8859-1?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no>, secteam@freebsd.org, FreeBSD-arch Arch <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: random(4) plugin infrastructure for mulitple RNG in a modular fashion Message-ID: <551C488B-D56A-4E9F-8617-17B96D3E7677@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <D218D7B1-AB8B-4A80-A822-A8F0AB1EF43C@grondar.org> References: <20130807183112.GA79319@dragon.NUXI.org> <86pptfnu33.fsf@nine.des.no> <20130815231713.GD76666@x96.org> <20130816002625.GE76666@x96.org> <9B274F48-0C88-4117-BEAC-1A555772A3C5@grondar.org> <86a9kf733d.fsf@nine.des.no> <0C97B866-A169-4141-8368-AA7F5B5382F4@grondar.org> <861u5r71zi.fsf@nine.des.no> <892B11BD-396D-4F82-B97C-753F72CA494D@grondar.org> <86r4dr5j3p.fsf@nine.des.no> <4C1BD77C-8C6B-4044-9285-5978A3BC4B70@kientzle.com> <537622E1-F785-4BFA-B829-09DCDB484606@grondar.org> <932AB5CA-778E-438D-8FD3-8C0F29F3D117@kientzle.com> <F908BF80-538B-4363-ACCC-3D860CBEE359@grondar.org> <71A92486-2213-421E-B3D2-E55816C18924@bsdimp.com> <D218D7B1-AB8B-4A80-A822-A8F0AB1EF43C@grondar.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Aug 19, 2013, at 1:31 AM, Mark R V Murray wrote: >=20 > On 19 Aug 2013, at 08:18, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: >> If we're going to allow passthrough, we should require the kernel = config to explicitly do something to get pass through. >>=20 >> nodevice yarrow >> device random_passthrough >>=20 >> would be my suggestion. >=20 > I don't think it will sell; folks are asking for GENERIC with a = run-time switch to flip between the raw HW generator output and a SW = mixer/conditioner. This is the config for no yarrow and pass through only. If you want = both, you should have both and a sysctl/tunable controlling the = wiring... >> I'd go so far as to say that if you have random in your kernel, then = you need to specify some "filter" or you get a compile-time error. = Specifying yarrow via DEFAULTS or std.foo is fine by me, since both of = those can be overriden fairly easily.... I'd also think we'd want to = FAIL_PANIC or FAIL_BLOCKING, and have that choice hard wired at some = level too, to be explicit about things. But maybe that's gilding things = a bit too much and a tunable would suffice=85 >=20 > Won't sell. Folks are saying they want the choice of the raw output. = In GENERIC. Nothing I've said will preclude it. What's in generic is policy, not = mechanism. > "What Will Sell" may be up for debate and mind-changing; I think that = is the route to explore. Maybe I need to be more articulate, since I'm trying to describe a = mechanism for having one or more filters, but having a compiler error = when there's zero... Warner=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?551C488B-D56A-4E9F-8617-17B96D3E7677>