On 2/10/19 9:25 AM, James Bottomley wrote: > On Sun, 2019-02-10 at 09:05 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 2/10/19 8:44 AM, James Bottomley wrote: >>> On Sun, 2019-02-10 at 10:17 +0100, Mikael Pettersson wrote: >>>> On Sat, Feb 9, 2019 at 7:19 PM James Bottomley >>>> <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> [...] >>>>> I think the reason for this is that the block mq path doesn't >>>>> feed >>>>> the kernel entropy pool correctly, hence the need to install an >>>>> entropy gatherer for systems that don't have other good random >>>>> number sources. >>>> >>>> That does sound plausible, I admit I didn't even consider the >>>> possibility that the old block I/O path also was an entropy >>>> source. >>> >>> In theory, the new one should be as well since the rotational >>> entropy >>> collector is on the SCSI completion path. I'd seen the same >>> problem >>> but had assumed it was something someone had done to our internal >>> entropy pool and thus hadn't bisected it. >> >> The difference is that the old stack included ADD_RANDOM by default, >> so this check: >> >> if (blk_queue_add_random(q)) >> add_disk_randomness(req->rq_disk); >> >> in scsi_end_request() would be true, and we'd add the randomness. For >> sd, it seems to set it just fine for non-rotational drives. Could >> this be because other devices don't? Maybe the below makes a >> difference. > > No, in both we set it per the rotational parameters of the disk in > > sd.c:sd_read_block_characteristics() > > rot = get_unaligned_be16(&buffer[4]); > > if (rot == 1) { > > blk_queue_flag_set(QUEUE_FLAG_NONROT, q); > > blk_queue_flag_clear(QUEUE_FLAG_ADD_RANDOM, q); > } else { > > blk_queue_flag_clear(QUEUE_FLAG_NONROT, q); > > blk_queue_flag_set(QUEUE_FLAG_ADD_RANDOM, q); > } > > > That check wasn't changed by the code removal. As I said above, for sd. This isn't true for non-disks. > Although I suspect it should be unconditional: even SSDs have what > would appear as seek latencies at least during writes depending on the > time taken to find an erased block or even trigger garbage collection. > The entropy collector is good at taking something completely regular > and spotting the inconsistencies, so it won't matter that loads of > "seeks" are deterministic. The reason it isn't is that it's of limited use for SSDs where it's a lot more predictable. And they are also a lot faster, which means the adding randomness is more problematic from an efficiency pov. -- Jens Axboe