From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030244Ab2GFWAa (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Jul 2012 18:00:30 -0400 Received: from li9-11.members.linode.com ([67.18.176.11]:37401 "EHLO imap.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932549Ab2GFWA1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Jul 2012 18:00:27 -0400 Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 17:59:58 -0400 From: "Theodore Ts'o" To: Eric Wustrow Cc: Linux Kernel Developers List , torvalds@linux-foundation.org, w@1wt.eu, zakir@umich.edu, greg@kroah.com, mpm@selenic.com, nadiah@cs.ucsd.edu, jhalderm@umich.edu, tglx@linutronix.de, davem@davemloft.net, stable@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] random: make 'add_interrupt_randomness()' do something sane Message-ID: <20120706215958.GA3922@thunk.org> Mail-Followup-To: Theodore Ts'o , Eric Wustrow , Linux Kernel Developers List , torvalds@linux-foundation.org, w@1wt.eu, zakir@umich.edu, greg@kroah.com, mpm@selenic.com, nadiah@cs.ucsd.edu, jhalderm@umich.edu, tglx@linutronix.de, davem@davemloft.net, stable@kernel.org References: <1341511933-11169-1-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> <1341511933-11169-2-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: tytso@thunk.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on imap.thunk.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 03:01:12PM -0400, Eric Wustrow wrote: > Will this do the long path in add_interrupt_randomness every 16 interrupts > instead of 128? Yes, but given that benchmarks didn't show any performance degradation even under a worst case scenario (i.e., no interrupt mitigation, and a crazy number of interrupts/second), I decided to leave things as they are. - Ted