On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 10:25 AM Daniel Golle <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 16, 2024 at 07:19:35PM +0200, Diederik de Haas wrote: > > On Tuesday, 16 July 2024 18:53:43 CEST Diederik de Haas wrote: > > > rngtest: FIPS 140-2(2001-10-10) Long run: 0 > > > > I don't know if it means something, but I noticed that I have > > ``Long run: 0`` with all my poor results, > > while Chen-Yu had ``Long run: 1``. > > > > Different SoC (RK3399), but Anand had ``Long run: 0`` too on their > > very poor result (100% failure): > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-rockchip/CANAwSgTTzZOwBaR9zjJ5VMpxm5BydtW6rB2S7jg+dnoX8hAoWg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > The conclusions I draw from that rather ugly situation are: > - The hwrng should not be enabled by default, but it should by done > for each board on which it is known to work well. > - RK_RNG_SAMPLE_CNT as well as the assumed rng quality should be > defined in DT for each board: > * introduce new 'rochchip,rng-sample-count' property > * read 'quality' property already used for timeriomem_rng > > I will prepare a follow-up patch taking those conclusions into account. > > Just for completeness, here my test result on the NanoPi R5C: > root@OpenWrt:~# cat /dev/hwrng | rngtest -c 1000 > rngtest 6.15 > Copyright (c) 2004 by Henrique de Moraes Holschuh > This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. > > rngtest: starting FIPS tests... > rngtest: bits received from input: 20000032 > rngtest: FIPS 140-2 successes: 875 > rngtest: FIPS 140-2 failures: 125 > rngtest: FIPS 140-2(2001-10-10) Monobit: 123 > rngtest: FIPS 140-2(2001-10-10) Poker: 5 > rngtest: FIPS 140-2(2001-10-10) Runs: 4 > rngtest: FIPS 140-2(2001-10-10) Long run: 0 > rngtest: FIPS 140-2(2001-10-10) Continuous run: 0 > rngtest: input channel speed: (min=85.171; avg=141.102; max=4882812.500)Kibits/s > rngtest: FIPS tests speed: (min=17.809; avg=19.494; max=60.169)Mibits/s > rngtest: Program run time: 139628605 microseconds I doubt this is per-board. The RNG is inside the SoC, so it could be a chip quality thing. On the RK3399 we also saw wildly varying results. ChenYu
