Patch Set 2: > Could you elaborate why that's more efficient?
Isn't it the cost of a syscall (very expensive) vs. the cost of a single conditional if statement? Or am I missing something? > AFAIK with the way we use getrandom, it can only fail permanently yes, exactly. This means that on the first getrandom() call it will fail the syscall -> we fall back to gnutls and memorize that fact. On second and further calls, we simply go directly to gnutls. > Moreover, I think GnuTLS uses getrandom internal when it's > available so I doubt that direct getrandom() call would fail for us > but succeed for GnuTLS. we are using gnutls for fallback in case there is no getrandom(). So gnutls would never be used in a situation where getrandom() is available, right? > Overall, I'd rather keep it as it is: isolated fallback for old > systems which can be trivially removed once we do not have to > support them anymore. Unless you have strong opinion to the > contrary of course. I am arguing for a "trivial fallback" but in a way that a single binary will determine at runtime if getrandom() is available, or if not, fall back to gnutls. -- To view, visit https://gerrit.osmocom.org/4593 To unsubscribe, visit https://gerrit.osmocom.org/settings Gerrit-MessageType: comment Gerrit-Change-Id: Ic77866ce65acf524b768882c751a4f9c0635740b Gerrit-PatchSet: 2 Gerrit-Project: libosmocore Gerrit-Branch: master Gerrit-Owner: Max <msur...@sysmocom.de> Gerrit-Reviewer: Harald Welte <lafo...@gnumonks.org> Gerrit-Reviewer: Jenkins Builder Gerrit-Reviewer: Max <msur...@sysmocom.de> Gerrit-HasComments: No
