From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Oct  3 15:34:34 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBCF0106566B
	for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>;
	Wed,  3 Oct 2012 15:34:33 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from rwmaillists@googlemail.com)
Received: from mail-ee0-f54.google.com (mail-ee0-f54.google.com [74.125.83.54])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A0B98FC08
	for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>;
	Wed,  3 Oct 2012 15:34:33 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by eekc50 with SMTP id c50so4435234eek.13
	for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>;
	Wed, 03 Oct 2012 08:34:32 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=googlemail.com; s=20120113;
	h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer
	:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	bh=bD63GbDbHuui9hBvGT+2Gl8Buz94lznIdxbF9dT3ysQ=;
	b=y23Q7n05+sxcP6Znqn8EsxeslaL1Iakra/dIaBvZk+cV5JK4pEP4aoZDdnG3yJpt0C
	wwRdMZCmUtSFgCuP/vMye7pqfZ4psGHANQGqJlBUb8wdfAhfIW5ISKyvXpccatk8yiqG
	vomb8z9QK6AIW2PNinVY/i0qWjZHVadi7G1wWGInsZfcLXt/En0VZ291pwWUj86rKR2G
	BUVGMxt+AIqYxEpZhehh5M41u7wNaCQmo7VEHnc/6xcBfJuv/naj7EyoJ9vPNd8V7uPP
	vPdyD8mRteFs9gx6krOqqaWla8fXrhnzuLyRxIT1XwePGmC6Ab8qnJZvm8awuugzVlmh
	yeOQ==
Received: by 10.14.203.73 with SMTP id e49mr3264962eeo.27.1349278472259;
	Wed, 03 Oct 2012 08:34:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gumby.homeunix.com (87-194-105-247.bethere.co.uk.
	[87.194.105.247])
	by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id n45sm10313771eeo.14.2012.10.03.08.34.29
	(version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 03 Oct 2012 08:34:31 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 16:34:27 +0100
From: RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com>
To: Dag-Erling =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no>
Message-ID: <20121003163427.2acff4e6@gumby.homeunix.com>
In-Reply-To: <86626raojm.fsf@ds4.des.no>
References: <20120918211422.GA1400@garage.freebsd.pl>
	<20120919231051.4bc5335b@gumby.homeunix.com>
	<20120920102104.GA1397@garage.freebsd.pl>
	<201209200758.51924.jhb@freebsd.org>
	<20120922080323.GA1454@garage.freebsd.pl>
	<20120922195325.GH1454@garage.freebsd.pl>
	<505E59DC.7090505@gmail.com>
	<20120923151706.GN1454@garage.freebsd.pl>
	<5060D723.6020305@gmail.com>
	<CAG5KPzxf0Rfufk5K6Jt4e85xc7zXY_B3a2Sq0Uf_uVLHbV-baw@mail.gmail.com>
	<86r4pqqwnm.fsf@ds4.des.no> <86ipat6n0o.fsf@ds4.des.no>
	<86y5joiyan.fsf@ds4.des.no>
	<20121003011607.5553fe48@gumby.homeunix.com>
	<86626raojm.fsf@ds4.des.no>
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.6; amd64-portbld-freebsd8.3)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Collecting entropy from device_attach() times.
X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]"
	<freebsd-security.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-security@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2012 15:34:34 -0000

On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 11:32:45 +0200
Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav wrote:

> RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com> writes:
> > It doesn't compute it in a weird way for amd64 and most i386
> > systems. Where possible, get_cyclecount is just a wrapper for
> > rdtsc, which I think it will be for all the systems you quoted
> > (with the possible exception of virtualbox).
>=20
> No.  All the machines I tested it on had TSCs, but not all i386
> machines we support do, so get_cyclecount() is always a function call
> on i386. Look at the code, or heck, disassemble my kernel if you
> don't believe me.

It appears that it changed in April (Revision 220347), so if they were
all running 9.1, 9-stable or head then you're quite right.=20

I was looking at my local source where it's still conditional on
"tsc_present".