Re: [PATCH RFC #2] hwrng: Add type categories

[Michael Buesch <mb@bu3sch.de>]

On Wednesday 27 June 2007 00:45:18 Matt Mackall wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 08:21:51PM +0200, Michael Buesch wrote:
> > Don't use the word "quality", as people seem to think of
> > the entropy quality when hearing that word.
> 
> Why do I so often feel compelled to respond with "did you read what I
> wrote?" on this list?

Because you ignored my explanations.

> I object to your MEANINGLESS CATEGORIES.
> 
> > This uses the word "type", which is probably better for
> > understanding what the value really means.
> 
> Please explain:
> 
> a) how is bad different from pseudo?
> b) how is onboard different than dedicated?

Read the Kdoc help text in the patch. It explains it.

> I maintain that there are exactly two categories on this axis: real
> and fake. And I'd rather stomp all over this notion of other
> categories you've invented now before people actually start trying to
> use them.
> 
> There are also two other axes that this approach neglects. Trusted
> (another boolean) and bitrate (a scalar).

No. Read this:
I will explain it once again: It is _just_ to select a default policy
of which RNG is initialized by default. The type does say _nothing_
about the entropy quality or something else. It _just_ judges about
which RNG is preferred for default initialization.
External RNG boards are preferred over internal onboard stuff; onboard
is preferred over bad RNGs like bcm43xx; bcm43xx is preferred over
devices that are not RNGs by definition but could be used as such (sensors).

-- 
Greetings Michael.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/