Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20190916042952.GB23719@1wt.eu> <CAHk-=wg4cONuiN32Tne28Cg2kEx6gsJCoOVroqgPFT7_Kg18Hg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190916061252.GA24002@1wt.eu> <CAHk-=wjWSRzTjwN9F5gQcxtPkAgaRHJOOOTUjVakqP-Nzg9BXA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190916172117.GB15263@mit.edu> <CAHk-=wgs65hez6ctK7J2k46BdQzvKU5avExPOTTJsZu6iqA-ow@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190916230217.vmgvsm6o2o4uq5j7@srcf.ucam.org> <CAHk-=whwSt4RqzqM7cA5SAhj+wkORfr1bG=+yydTJPtayQ0JwQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190916231103.bic65ab4ifv7vhio@srcf.ucam.org> <CAHk-=wjwJDznDUsiaXH=UCxFRQxNEpj2tTCa0GvZm2WB4+hJ4A@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190916232922.GA7880@darwi-home-pc> <CAHk-=wh2PuYtuUVt523j20cTceN+ps8UNJY=uRWQuRaDeDyLQw@mail.gmail.com>
 <BEF07E89-E36D-480F-AB1E-25C80C9DABE7@srcf.ucam.org>
In-Reply-To: <BEF07E89-E36D-480F-AB1E-25C80C9DABE7@srcf.ucam.org>
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date:   Mon, 16 Sep 2019 18:41:36 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHk-=whfPwei+yf9vBgfSuG5HDtiYmt3nOu9Js+vkTYSrMf2ow@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Linux 5.3-rc8
To:     Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>
Cc:     "Ahmed S. Darwish" <darwish.07@gmail.com>,
        "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>,
        Vito Caputo <vcaputo@pengaru.com>,
        Lennart Poettering <mzxreary@0pointer.de>,
        Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@dilger.ca>,
        Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Ray Strode <rstrode@redhat.com>,
        William Jon McCann <mccann@jhu.edu>,
        "Alexander E. Patrakov" <patrakov@gmail.com>,
        zhangjs <zachary@baishancloud.com>, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
        lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 6:24 PM Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org> wrote:
>
> Exactly the scenario where you want getrandom() to block, yes.

It *would* block. Just not forever.

And btw, the whole "generate key at boot when nothing else is going
on" is already broken, so presumably nobody actually does it.

See why I'm saying "hypothetical"? You're doing it again.

> >Then you have to ignore the big warning too.
>
> The big warning that's only printed in dmesg?

Well, the patch actually made getrandom() return en error too, but you
seem more interested in the hypotheticals than in arguing actualities.

          Linus