On Thu, 2016-11-10 at 19:16 +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: > Nikos, Laurent, > So, I must admit that after your respective mails, I'm still not > clear. Do you think I should keep this patch, change it, or > discard it? It is a bit confusing to me. The sentences: "When reading from /dev/urandom (GRND_RANDOM is not set), getrandom()" and "The behavior when a call to getrandom() that is blocked while reading from /dev/urandom" seem to imply that getrandom() is a wrapper over /dev/urandom (i.e., internally it opens the device reads etc). That's not the case the system call doesn't go through /dev/urandom, although the pools behind are the same. maybe saying the /dev/urandom pool instead, but I find that even that could confuse someone. So while the text is better and more precise in other aspects than before I think it is a bit confusing the mix of getrandom() with /dev/urandom and /dev/random. Maybe copy the text back and separate the descriptions even if they are very similar at the moment? regards, Nikos -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
