On 6/27/22, Jason A. Donenfeld <ja...@zx2c4.com> wrote:
> On 6/27/22, Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, 27 Jun 2022 at 17:07, Jason A. Donenfeld <ja...@zx2c4.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> In 60592cfed2 ("hw/arm/virt: dt: add kaslr-seed property"), the
>>> kaslr-seed property was added, but the equally as important rng-seed
>>> property was forgotten about, which has identical semantics for a
>>> similar purpose. This commit implements it in exactly the same way as
>>> kaslr-seed.
>>
>> Not an objection, since if this is what the dtb spec says we need
>> to provide then I guess we need to provide it, but:
>> Why do we need to give the kernel two separate random seeds?
>> Isn't one sufficient for the kernel to seed its RNG and generate
>> whatever randomness it needs for whatever purposes it wants it?
>>
>
> Seems a bit silly to me too. `rng-seed` alone ought to be sufficient.
> After the kernel calls add_bootloader_randomness() on it,
> get_random_long() can be used for kaslr'ing and everything else too.
> So I'm not sure what's up, but here we are. Maybe down the line I'll
> look into the details and formulate a plan to remove `kaslr-seed` if
> my supposition is correct.
>
> Jason
>Was wondering if you planned to queue this up? Jason
