From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@intel.com>,
Peng Tao <tao.peng@emc.com>,
devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Nikita Danilov <nikita@clusterfs.com>
Subject: lustre: why does cfs_get_random_bytes() exist?
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 12:39:08 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131003163908.GD31721@thunk.org> (raw)
I've been auditing uses of get_random_bytes() since there are places
where get_random_bytes() is getting used where something weaker, such
as prandom_u32() is quite sufficient. Basically, if kernel code just
needs a random number which does not have any cryptographic
requirements (such as in ext[234]. which gets the new block group used
for inode allocations using get_random_bytes), then prandom_u32()
should be used instead of get_random_bytes() to save CPU overhead and
to reduce the drain on the /dev/urandom's entropy pool.
Typically, the reason for this is either for historical reasons, since
prandom_u32() hadn't existed when the code was written, or because
historical code was cut and pasted into newer code.
When I came across staging/lustre/lustre/libcfs/prng.c, I saw
something which is **really** weird. It defines a cfs_rand() which is
functionally identical to prandom_u32(). More puzzlingly, it also
defines cfs_get_random_bytes() which calls get_random_bytes() and then
xor's the result with cfs_rand(). That last step has no cryptographic
effect, so I'm really wondering who thought this as a good idea and/or
necessary.
What I think should happen is that staging/lustre/lustre/libcfs/prng.c
should be removed, and calls to cfs_rand() should get replaced
prandom_u32(), and cfs_get_random_bytes() should get replaced with
get_random_bytes().
Does this sound reasonable?
Cheers,
- Ted
next reply other threads:[~2013-10-03 16:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-03 16:39 Theodore Ts'o [this message]
2013-10-03 17:26 ` lustre: why does cfs_get_random_bytes() exist? Greg KH
2013-10-03 19:34 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-10-03 23:06 ` Dilger, Andreas
2013-10-03 23:45 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-10-05 6:10 ` Dilger, Andreas
2013-10-05 14:21 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-10-05 15:51 ` Christoph Hellwig
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20131003163908.GD31721@thunk.org \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=andreas.dilger@intel.com \
--cc=devel@driverdev.osuosl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nikita@clusterfs.com \
--cc=tao.peng@emc.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).