On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 1:51 AM, Torsten Duwe <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 09:41:10AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 9:06 AM, Torsten Duwe <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > This patch introduces a derating factor to struct hwrng for >> > the random bits going into the kernel input pool, and a common >> > default derating for drivers which do not specify one. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Torsten Duwe <[email protected]> >> > >> > --- >> > drivers/char/hw_random/core.c | 11 ++++++++++- >> > include/linux/hw_random.h | 3 +++ >> > 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> > >> > --- linux/include/linux/hw_random.h.orig >> > +++ linux/include/linux/hw_random.h >> > @@ -29,6 +29,8 @@ >> > * @read: New API. drivers can fill up to max bytes of data >> > * into the buffer. The buffer is aligned for any >> > type. >> > * @priv: Private data, for use by the RNG driver. >> > + * @derating: Estimation of true entropy in RNG's bitstream >> > + * (per mill). >> >> I'll bikeshed again: this is a rating, not a *de*rating. Higher = >> more confidence, at least assuming the comment is right. >> > You're right. Would anyone object to call it "quality", as in RX signal > quality? > In context of a random source that is pretty accurate, I'd say. Other > opinions?
I'm okay with "quality", although I'm still partial to "entropy_per_1000bits". --Andy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
