Hi Harald,
On Tue, Jul 12, 2022 at 02:09:35PM +0200, Harald Freudenberger wrote:
> > You've gone through the troubles of confirming experimentally what
> > in_task() does, but that doesn't answer *why* it should be disallowed
> > variously in each one of these contexts.
>
> I think, I showed this. The only real occurrences remaining for the
> arch_get_random_seed_long() call is within softirq context when the
> network layer tries to allocate some skb buffers. My personal feeling
> about this is that it does not hurt - but I asked our network guys
> and their feedback is clear: no way - every delay there may cause
> high bandwidth traffic to stumble and this is to be absolutely avoided.
> However, they can't give me any measurements.
>
> So yes, the intention is now with checking for in_task() to prevent
> the trng call in hard and soft interrupt context. But still I'd like
> to meet your condition to provide good random at kernel startup.
That's too bad, but okay.
Final question: do you see any of the in_task() vs in_whatever()
semantics changing if arch_get_random_words{,_seed}() is ever
implemented, which would reduce the current multitude of calls to the
trng to a single call?
Jason
