From: Randy MacLeod <randy.macleod@windriver.com>
To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org, anuj.mittal@intel.com,
scott.murray@konsulko.com,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
jsmoeller@linuxfoundation.org, stephane.desneux@iot.bzh,
Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>,
Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: david.zuhn@sonos.com
Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] rng-tools: Revert "rng-tools: move to meta-oe"
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:44:00 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <efec0d97-cab1-43a9-96e3-1cf6627109a5@windriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <17AB7F9C512EBC5E.27523@lists.openembedded.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1582 bytes --]
Sorry for the noise and back and forth on rng-tools removal.
I'll avoid hastily cleaning up things for a while! ;-)
On 2024-01-18 11:59 a.m., Randy MacLeod via lists.openembedded.org wrote:
> From: Randy MacLeod<Randy.MacLeod@windriver.com>
>
> This reverts commit d2b445384da3f3e6dab8577b6c56648b5244a788.
>
> Revert this commit since:
>
> - some systems using oe-core master may still be using kernels from
> before 5.6 pulled in the rng-tools algorithm, and
>
> - some hardware platforms may not have a hardware random number generator
> and could therefore need to run rngd to avoid long boot-time initialization
> due to a depleted entropy pool.
The additional context that doesn't belong in the commit log
is that we talked about this change in the YP bug review meeting
and decided that we would keep rng-tools in oe-core for 5.0-M2
for the two reasons given above. If we end up adding a test, as
described below,
we may never move the recipe to meta-oe.
It seems to me that we need a test that checks if the entropy pool size
ever falls below a critical threshold for "too long" in the first N
seconds of boot time.
Getting that test written so that:
- qemu VMs and
- real HW with and without /dev/hwrng
all pass without the test being too permissive may take some time.
I've created a bug to track adding such a test:
https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15360
Scott,
Do you have any info on the need for rngd on HW without /dev/hwrng but
with a kernel >= 5.6 ?
../Randy
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2497 bytes --]
parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-18 17:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
[parent not found: <17AB7F9C512EBC5E.27523@lists.openembedded.org>]
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=efec0d97-cab1-43a9-96e3-1cf6627109a5@windriver.com \
--to=randy.macleod@windriver.com \
--cc=alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com \
--cc=anuj.mittal@intel.com \
--cc=david.zuhn@sonos.com \
--cc=jsmoeller@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
--cc=raj.khem@gmail.com \
--cc=richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=scott.murray@konsulko.com \
--cc=stephane.desneux@iot.bzh \
/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