On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 4:22 PM Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wednesday, 17 July 2024 04:58:51 CEST Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: > > 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/CANAwSgTTzZOwBaR9zjJ5VMpxm5BydtW6 > > > > rB2S7jg+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. > > I agree with ChenYu (and others) that this is isn't a per-board level thing. > I'd even go further: 's/I doubt/It can't be that/' (for the same reason > though; this is inside the SoC). > > Before I saw these latest emails, I was going to suggest: > 1. Enable it only on RK3568 for now. I would be fine if this would be accepted > by the maintainer > > 2. Ask that you make a special version (for me) where I could play with the > params without having to compile a new kernel for each variant (it generally > takes me more then 24h on my Q64-A). Either through kernel module properties > or properties defined in the DeviceTree is fine with me. > > 3. Based on the results make a choice to not enable it on rk3566 at all or > (indeed) introduce DT properties to configure it differently per SoC. > > 4. Hope/Ask for more test results > > > On the RK3399 we also saw wildly varying results. > > On my Rock64('s) (RK3328) it doesn't work at all: > > ``` > root@cs21:~# cat /dev/hwrng | rngtest -c 1000 > rngtest 5 > ... > rngtest: starting FIPS tests... > cat: /dev/hwrng: No such device > rngtest: entropy source drained > ``` RK3399 and RK3328 are covered by a different driver: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230707115242.3411259-1-clabbe@xxxxxxxxxxxx/ And that patch says the TRNG on the RK3328 is utterly broken. ChenYu > Cheers, > Diederik
