From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752047AbcFUS6h (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Jun 2016 14:58:37 -0400 Received: from mail.eperm.de ([89.247.134.16]:37866 "EHLO mail.eperm.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750701AbcFUS6g (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Jun 2016 14:58:36 -0400 From: Stephan Mueller To: John Stultz Cc: Herbert Xu , Arnd Bergmann , Alexander Kuleshov , y2038 Mailman List , lkml , linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" , Kees Cook Subject: Re: [PATCH] crypto: Jitter RNG - use ktime_get_raw_ns as fallback Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 20:49:17 +0200 Message-ID: <1724645.8YjKaqazLv@positron.chronox.de> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.5.5-201.fc23.x86_64; KDE/4.14.20; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <8242305.3NQCWfJAlD@positron.chronox.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Am Dienstag, 21. Juni 2016, 11:11:42 schrieb John Stultz: Hi John, > I don't see in the above an explanation of *why* you're using > ktime_get_raw_ns() instead of ktime_get_ns(). Could you help me understand what the difference is or point me to some documentation? I understood that we only talked about the _raw variant. > > Also the bit about time running backwards being ok is confusing since > you're not using the "fast" accessor where that would be a risk. Ok, if the running backwards hint is only applicable to the _fast variants, I can certainly drop it. Thanks Stephan