Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-crypto+bounces-472-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Message-ID: <640c12810b336aa99584697e21215f3cacb13c79.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Subject: Re: jitterentropy vs. simulation
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: Simo Sorce <simo@redhat.com>, Anton Ivanov
 <anton.ivanov@kot-begemot.co.uk>,  linux-um@lists.infradead.org
Cc: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, Stephan =?ISO-8859-1?Q?M=FCller?=
	 <smueller@chronox.de>
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2023 21:04:30 +0100
In-Reply-To: <e1b3ccb744d67e6214cf206ba8480cb3e35694cf.camel@redhat.com>
References: 
	<e4800de3138d3987d9f3c68310fcd9f3abc7a366.camel@sipsolutions.net>
	 <7db861e3-60e4-0ed4-9b28-25a89069a9db@kot-begemot.co.uk>
	 <8ddb48606cebe4e404d17a627138aa5c5af6dccd.camel@sipsolutions.net>
	 <e1b3ccb744d67e6214cf206ba8480cb3e35694cf.camel@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
User-Agent: Evolution 3.48.4 (3.48.4-1.fc38) 
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0

On Fri, 2023-12-01 at 14:25 -0500, Simo Sorce wrote:
>=20
> Doesn't this imply the simulation is not complete

Kind of?

>  and you need to add
> clock jitter for the simulation to be more useful?
>=20

No, it's more _intentionally_ incomplete. This works fine in normal
ARCH=3Dum, but with time-travel variants we have more of a discrete event-
based simulation, to integrates well with other things (e.g. SystemC or
similar based device simulations). So this is quite intentional, and
yes, it breaks in a few spots such as this one.

johannes