From owner-freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Fri Aug 24 20:42:03 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E433109364C for ; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:42:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (mailman.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::50:5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A067175C51 for ; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:42:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 64D55109364B; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:42:02 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: bugs@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 535DF109364A for ; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:42:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org (mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E9BF675C4C for ; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:42:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 43C6F12C46 for ; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:42:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id w7OKg1Hs046116 for ; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:42:01 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id w7OKg1bW046113 for bugs@FreeBSD.org; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:42:01 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 230870] Deprecate Yarrow Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:42:01 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: new X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: CURRENT X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: cem@freebsd.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: bugs@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_id short_desc product version rep_platform op_sys bug_status bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: Bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:42:03 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D230870 Bug ID: 230870 Summary: Deprecate Yarrow Product: Base System Version: CURRENT Hardware: Any OS: Any Status: New Severity: Affects Only Me Priority: --- Component: kern Assignee: bugs@FreeBSD.org Reporter: cem@freebsd.org I think we should deprecate Yarrow as soon as we possibly can. I think it would be reasonable to gone_in(12) it, even, removing it from tree before stable/12. At the very least, it should be gone_in(13)'d and removed after stable/12 branches. We discussed this briefly on orthogonal devrandom bugs, and one concern rai= sed was embedded systems may prefer the lower space usage of Yarrow. In response to that, I quantified the difference in state size and came up = with 962 bytes. Do we have embedded systems today that would trade a weak devra= ndom for 962 bytes of memory? I suspect not. IIRC, the smallest system we can run on today is either 32 = or 64 MB, and even that requires quite a bit of manual tweaking to get a minim= al kernel and almost no userspace. And on such a 32MB system, 962 bytes is 0.003%. Is that small enough to be de minimis? I think so. If you can't = run with 33553470 bytes of memory it is unlikely you will be able to run with 33554432. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=