On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 09:05:41AM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On So, 15.09.19 09:01, Willy Tarreau (w@xxxxxx) wrote: > > > On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 08:56:55AM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > > There's benefit in being able to wait until the pool is initialized > > > before we update the random seed stored on disk with a new one, > > > > And what exactly makes you think that waiting with arms crossed not > > doing anything else has any chance to make the situation change if > > you already had no such entropy available when reaching that first > > call, especially during early boot ? > > That code can finish 5h after boot, it's entirely fine with this > specific usecase. > > Again: we don't delay "the boot" for this. We just delay "writing a > new seed to disk" for this. And if that is 5h later, then that's > totally fine, because in the meantime it's just one bg process more that > hangs around waiting to do what it needs to do. Didn't you say it could also happen when using encrypted swap ? If so I suspect this could happen very early during boot, before any services may be started ? Willy
