Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:6744:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id w4csp1381855pxu; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 10:30:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz8yKp0wBwFO7vGYYyiPdG3z+7tJrYWyKThEAhPu3yLc1ZV0Obaz6TEVNf6MXV8XaOJiJUx X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:5247:: with SMTP id y7mr4709936ejm.503.1602869416183; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 10:30:16 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1602869416; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=Vtd7KUtd0diTjsEesshRiJHhykSr43DfjDQxPoShHKuh7J9AbfHOVnU2ED8CpCtMmT d5RS8FpZ19xJpLge5ODgPGiGwjlXx8oDKT3KgSCzGoCqbotHStIsN6AqwRvakvqgC75q VGhCVzqpBVKJjZjOxVXmDYaqAw6dSGvq4jLg9Evj0s6Kbi57DoVSag/LJ3u4MokaJaCU 6RMc6uGJl7qhUyFaz5gseci7NZC/tlfO8pX0TFaLtKEjm3YkQ4C8b0zhUo4rFvfxxlEX 7WTc67Y5vQOXQJY3Vd7/yeE/Tyn4WQO34AnGnRgCOAzeHv4s0qxMgkUAMvu5cJGkJk30 aJHw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:user-agent:in-reply-to:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=g1NKVFTqqL3Fz7ms8We/Z7pgtgITPOcL7xwABWKpb1s=; b=I4tPuzUylG/5kNGD4B+mUN3axj9+e+1jDzESN6BiKBdpWrY0xewswCJFvP/MtErqsn WSjPTACS2RkF4XUBei+4nswSw92Cmu0e6ojwkfeLQOHV9yupiD0FG8AB0qX+5kC2MfkR FH+9Af+qMBYmvXojiT6lVva9RkjzvjrCD4EGXnPcOQOpJP3rZUPbsQqB7VVerq/IZZAG r7qcEHLTAyfocRoOFkdTlxVuLD8EkOLaad5ZKUVhRrLigHdvR2R/X+lZwWgKCCPCXwkS mAHFVKtZ1DQ7dhyqwTV8HwgDgMSun+Vx7QjTD5/k6FLZ3tXkL/tbkOmK88+/1WJv+QW1 YknQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id t25si2131972ejr.282.2020.10.16.10.29.44; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 10:30:16 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2391429AbgJPR00 (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 16 Oct 2020 13:26:26 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:36538 "EHLO verein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2391280AbgJPR00 (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Oct 2020 13:26:26 -0400 Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2005) id 68CC068BEB; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 19:26:19 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 19:26:19 +0200 From: Torsten Duwe To: Stephan Mueller Cc: Willy Tarreau , "Theodore Y. Ts'o" , linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, Nicolai Stange , LKML , Arnd Bergmann , Greg Kroah-Hartman , "Eric W. Biederman" , "Alexander E. Patrakov" , "Ahmed S. Darwish" , Matthew Garrett , Vito Caputo , Andreas Dilger , Jan Kara , Ray Strode , William Jon McCann , zhangjs , Andy Lutomirski , Florian Weimer , Lennart Poettering , Peter Matthias , Marcelo Henrique Cerri , Neil Horman , Randy Dunlap , Julia Lawall , Dan Carpenter , Andy Lavr , Eric Biggers , "Jason A. Donenfeld" , Petr Tesarik Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION PATCH 00/41] random: possible ways towards NIST SP800-90B compliance Message-ID: <20201016172619.GA18410@lst.de> References: <20200921075857.4424-1-nstange@suse.de> <20201002123836.GA14807@lst.de> <20201002131555.GD3783@1wt.eu> <2961243.vtBmWVcJkq@tauon.chronox.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2961243.vtBmWVcJkq@tauon.chronox.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Oct 02, 2020 at 03:56:28PM +0200, Stephan Mueller wrote: > Am Freitag, 2. Oktober 2020, 15:15:55 CEST schrieb Willy Tarreau: > > Hi Willy, > > > > And this is all ??? > > > > Possibly a lot of people got used to seeing the numerous versions > > and are less attentive to new series, it's possible that your message > > will wake everyone up. > > I think that points to my patch series. My patch series which provide a > complete separate, API and ABI compliant drop in replacement of /dev/random, > nobody from the gatekeepers cared to even answer. It would not touch the > existing code. > > After waiting some time without changing the code (e.g. after Andi Lutomirski > commented), I got no answer at all from the gatekeepers, not even any > indication in what direction I should move if something was not desired in the > patch series. > > Thus I continued adding the features that I think are necessary and for which > I received comments from mathematicians. What else should I do? > > With the patch set v35 of my patch series, I see all my goals finally > achieved at I expect the code to be stable from here on. The last one was the > hardest: to get rid of all non-cryptographic conditioning operations and yet > retain performance en par or even superior to the existing /dev/random > implementation. Would you mind to resend it here, for a comparison? Torsten