From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 56F22C3DA4A for ; Thu, 1 Aug 2024 16:49:25 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Message-ID:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date: MIME-Version:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=jPClc5OP0a9QUvjXpGJsJVrUxn5Ch1JktZFLY54Dr9g=; b=eTprUramLWLMJRDf0r9pvPtP6Y 8gH1b/fDf9Vnb6FdTkz9qVgl/yYuwNLYeDcpRHzMtHtDb4s0e3dQUupxHqhXh/Y7w707DErCdZurr j7LMrItAv6P3evSGh624av2NQ3WdK3CReC+acqP32C9R5cNLCj4FuxQf2hPhedPKocURAtnSBHWQt B9zGyEMkvY7PFwORe2FHFuUC26Br/QlUxDuRN5GBMSHLkwSl1Y+7mqEL2z+QOwOGJ/S7bRVYBOqAY vRS3TQjO55zfriAtLGSx14lKj8CFOPSaONWLolaMCHOpMTi/46IGrBb13eFyoGJTe5LweTGZN44He DG39Eoxg==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1sZYzK-000000069oc-3wi9; Thu, 01 Aug 2024 16:49:14 +0000 Received: from mail.manjaro.org ([116.203.91.91]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1sZYyq-000000069l2-3Ron; Thu, 01 Aug 2024 16:48:46 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=manjaro.org; s=2021; t=1722530920; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=jPClc5OP0a9QUvjXpGJsJVrUxn5Ch1JktZFLY54Dr9g=; b=MnoBjUS/QslsJRcK0L/SKKwNPnUDn+etkJgm3yZhSmSJMnu5iLcaHVTPuw/0rj3ijsy4sN CEkYEIu7JeLHrs6Ygj6NpVDhWGDBbG9PCooB8i8evHCZ870AEFnTeeBOwuKSapGnOKAGG1 DgNRROAjkM+gzXKutfi+A8uAEDf53QgexbZN9qQgx0A0OP5IDBH3swT0U9Pf6xPEkR7Fpv okdNO/othF6Sh1DHxb8seSjY0gPATf/DnxOnaUcnG5STKZsvbIE6yMLdmf+IK0Git1qAgp g6eu74Bk/GL0o77yBvY8xPn6qPBTgl2Pf0mCGWjb9XZ3m5xnIr8ncFceFh85cQ== Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2024 18:48:36 +0200 From: Dragan Simic To: Daniel Golle Cc: Diederik de Haas , Chen-Yu Tsai , linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Rob Herring , Conor Dooley , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Herbert Xu , Martin Kaiser , Sascha Hauer , Sebastian Reichel , Ard Biesheuvel , =?UTF-8?Q?Uwe_Kleine-K=C3=B6nig?= , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, Philipp Zabel , Olivia Mackall , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Aurelien Jarno , Heiko Stuebner Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/3] hwrng: add hwrng support for Rockchip RK3568 In-Reply-To: References: <3190961.CRkYR5qTbq@bagend> <4406786.zLnsZ2vfAB@bagend> Message-ID: <97dfca058858d7a5d933ddf7a84dba61@manjaro.org> X-Sender: dsimic@manjaro.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Authentication-Results: ORIGINATING; auth=pass smtp.auth=dsimic@manjaro.org smtp.mailfrom=dsimic@manjaro.org X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20240801_094845_359561_DD167982 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 16.80 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Hello Daniel, On 2024-07-30 01:18, Daniel Golle wrote: > On Wed, Jul 24, 2024 at 08:07:51AM +0200, Dragan Simic wrote: >> Thanks a lot for the testing. Though, such wildly different test >> results >> can, regrettably, lead to only one conclusion: the HWRNG found in >> RK3566 >> is unusable. :/ > > The results on RK3568 look much better and the series right now also > only enabled the RNG on RK3568 systems. However, we have only seen few > boards with RK3568 up to now, and I only got a couple of NanoPi R5C > here to test, all with good hwrng results. > > Do you think it would be agreeable to only enable the HWRNG for RK3568 > as suggested in this series? Or are we expecting quality to also vary > as much as it (sadly) does for RK3566? I'm a bit late to the party, sorry for that. The test results so far show that the HWRNG in RK3566 simply cannot be relied upon, but the test results also show that the RK3568's HWRNG seems fine. I'm wondering why, but until we bump into a sample of RK3568 whose HWRNG performs badly, I'd say that enabling the HWRNG on RK3568 only is safe. Of course, as other people already noted, the HWRNG should be defined in rk356x.dtsi, because it does exist in both SoC variants, but should be enabled in rk3568.dtsi only. As already noted, describing it as broken on RK3566 in rk356x.dtsi should also be good.