On (Fri) 08 Aug 2014 [14:46:27], H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 08/08/2014 02:07 AM, Amit Shah wrote: > > > > > >> To > >> some degree the above is obsolete when we get khwrngd widely deployed, > >> but that is a new-kernel-only kind of thing. > > > > Right - I'm wondering if any such changes as propsed here are now > > obsolted already by khwrngd? > > > > In this case, yes, khwrngd would be a better solution for current kernels. I think that's OK with me. What's the suggested value for rng->quality, though, for virtio-rng that I can use to ensure the kthread starts? Should I use the 700 (70%) as proposed in the original patchset? I'm not exactly sure how that value will be used as well.. Amit _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
