On Thu, May 30 2013, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Jens Axboe writes:
> > On Wed, Feb 27 2013, Rusty Russell wrote:
> >> Aurelien Jarno writes:
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > I have noticed that virtio-rng only returns zero for kernels >= 2.6.33
> >> > built with CONFIG_HW_RANDOM=m. This is a bit much too pre
Jens Axboe writes:
> On Wed, Feb 27 2013, Rusty Russell wrote:
>> Aurelien Jarno writes:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I have noticed that virtio-rng only returns zero for kernels >= 2.6.33
>> > built with CONFIG_HW_RANDOM=m. This is a bit much too predictable for a
>> > random generator ;-).
>>
>> Wow. F
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 11:56:55AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
>
> OK, I looked at doing a kmalloc and copy in virtio_rng, but it's very
> inelegant (we don't know what size of buffer to allocate).
As the hwrng API allows you to return any number of bytes, you
can just go back to the old virtio-rn
Aurelien Jarno writes:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 11:56:55AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
>> Aurelien Jarno writes:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I have noticed that virtio-rng only returns zero for kernels >= 2.6.33
>> > built with CONFIG_HW_RANDOM=m. This is a bit much too predictable for a
>> > random gene
Jens Axboe writes:
> On Wed, Feb 27 2013, Rusty Russell wrote:
>> Subject: scatterlist: sg_set_buf() argument must be in linear mapping.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/scatterlist.h b/include/linux/scatterlist.h
>> index 4bd6c06..9365375 100644
>> --- a/incl
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 11:56:55AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Aurelien Jarno writes:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have noticed that virtio-rng only returns zero for kernels >= 2.6.33
> > built with CONFIG_HW_RANDOM=m. This is a bit much too predictable for a
> > random generator ;-).
> >
> > The reason fo
On Wed, Feb 27 2013, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Aurelien Jarno writes:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have noticed that virtio-rng only returns zero for kernels >= 2.6.33
> > built with CONFIG_HW_RANDOM=m. This is a bit much too predictable for a
> > random generator ;-).
>
> Wow. Fortunately, all of SLES, RHEL,
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 10:43:37AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Aurelien Jarno writes:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have noticed that virtio-rng only returns zero for kernels >= 2.6.33
> > built with CONFIG_HW_RANDOM=m. This is a bit much too predictable for a
> > random generator ;-).
>
> Wow. Fortunatel
On Wed, 2013-02-27 at 10:43 +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Aurelien Jarno writes:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have noticed that virtio-rng only returns zero for kernels >= 2.6.33
> > built with CONFIG_HW_RANDOM=m. This is a bit much too predictable for a
> > random generator ;-).
>
> Wow. Fortunately, all
Aurelien Jarno writes:
> Hi,
>
> I have noticed that virtio-rng only returns zero for kernels >= 2.6.33
> built with CONFIG_HW_RANDOM=m. This is a bit much too predictable for a
> random generator ;-).
>
> The reason for that is virtio expects guest real addresses, while
> rng_core.ko (ie when bui
Aurelien Jarno writes:
> Hi,
>
> I have noticed that virtio-rng only returns zero for kernels >= 2.6.33
> built with CONFIG_HW_RANDOM=m. This is a bit much too predictable for a
> random generator ;-).
Wow. Fortunately, all of SLES, RHEL, Ubuntu or Fedora set
CONFIG_HW_RANDOM=y. What do they kn
Hi,
I have noticed that virtio-rng only returns zero for kernels >= 2.6.33
built with CONFIG_HW_RANDOM=m. This is a bit much too predictable for a
random generator ;-).
The reason for that is virtio expects guest real addresses, while
rng_core.ko (ie when built as a module) is passing a vmalloced
12 matches
Mail list logo