From owner-freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 4 22:01:28 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 664) id 25AA71065739; Tue, 4 Sep 2012 22:01:28 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2012 15:01:26 -0700 From: David O'Brien To: Doug Barton Message-ID: <20120904220126.GA85339@dragon.NUXI.org> References: <201208222337.q7MNbORo017642@svn.freebsd.org> <5043E449.8050005@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5043E449.8050005@FreeBSD.org> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT X-to-the-FBI-CIA-and-NSA: HI! HOW YA DOIN? can i haz chizburger? User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Cc: Arthur Mesh , freebsd-security@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org, Mark Murray Subject: Re: svn commit: r239598 - head/etc/rc.d X-BeenThere: freebsd-rc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: obrien@freebsd.org List-Id: "Discussion related to /etc/rc.d design and implementation." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2012 22:01:28 -0000 On Sun, Sep 02, 2012 at 03:57:13PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote: > On 08/22/2012 16:37, David E. O'Brien wrote: > > Author: obrien > > Date: Wed Aug 22 23:37:24 2012 > > New Revision: 239598 > > URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/239598 > > > > Log: > > * Reinstate r128059's consumption of our best entropy first. > > r128060 for "hardware-supplied entropy" reversed this without reason, > > seems a typo. > > I object to this change as well, although mostly for sentimental > reasons. :) Hi Doug, Hope you had a good Labor Day Holiday. I'm sorry I didn't see your messages before I committed another change to this file (r240108). I had it ready to commit last Thursday night, but didn't want to commit it before being AFK over the holiday. > It's also dubious whether the static /entropy file is > really the "best" option at that point, since the "better than nothing" > entropy at least contains some elements that have the potential to be > different at boot time. I may be misreading. Are you suggesting you don't have much faith that there is a good amount of entropy in the saved "/entropy" as produced by /dev/random? > > * Isolate "better than nothing" implementation to a function. > > We generally don't extract code that's only run once into a function, > and my stylistic preference is that we do not do that. I'll go thru your messages and take a look at your diff. I think what I committed is a better abstraction. I think the name of the function helps drive the point that that entropy gathering isn't all that good, and makes reading the logic flow of the code easier to read. -- -- David (obrien@NUXI.org)