From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S271278AbTHRGoH (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Aug 2003 02:44:07 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S271279AbTHRGoH (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Aug 2003 02:44:07 -0400 Received: from h68-147-142-75.cg.shawcable.net ([68.147.142.75]:14066 "EHLO schatzie.adilger.int") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S271278AbTHRGoF (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Aug 2003 02:44:05 -0400 Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 00:43:13 -0600 From: Andreas Dilger To: Matt Mackall Cc: Andrew Morton , tytso@mit.edu, jmorris@intercode.com.au, jamie@shareable.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, davem@redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Make cryptoapi non-optional? Message-ID: <20030818004313.T3708@schatzie.adilger.int> Mail-Followup-To: Matt Mackall , Andrew Morton , tytso@mit.edu, jmorris@intercode.com.au, jamie@shareable.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, davem@redhat.com References: <20030809173329.GU31810@waste.org> <20030810174528.GZ31810@waste.org> <20030813032038.GA1244@think> <20030813040614.GP31810@waste.org> <20030815221211.GA4306@think> <20030815235501.GB325@waste.org> <20030815170532.06e14e89.akpm@osdl.org> <20030816043816.GC325@waste.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <20030816043816.GC325@waste.org>; from mpm@selenic.com on Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 11:38:16PM -0500 X-GPG-Key: 1024D/0D35BED6 X-GPG-Fingerprint: 7A37 5D79 BF1B CECA D44F 8A29 A488 39F5 0D35 BED6 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Aug 15, 2003 23:38 -0500, Matt Mackall wrote: > a) extract_entropy (pool->lock) > > For nitpickers, there remains a vanishingly small possibility that > two readers could get identical results from the pool by hitting a > window immediately after reseeding, after accounting, _and_ after > feedback mixing. It wasn't even vanishingly small... We had a problem in our code where two readers got the same 64-bit value calling get_random_bytes(), and we were depending on this 64-bit value being unique. This problem was fixed by putting a spinlock around the call to get_random_bytes(). Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger http://sourceforge.net/projects/ext2resize/ http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/