On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 11:15:20AM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> IRQF_SAMPLE_RANDOM is 3 years past its sell-by date in
> feature-removal-schedule:
>
> What: IRQF_SAMPLE_RANDOM
> Check: IRQF_SAMPLE_RANDOM
> When: July 2009
>
> Why: Many of IRQF_SAMPLE_RANDOM users are technically bogus as
> entropy sources in the kernel's current entropy model. To
> resolve this, every input point to the kernel's entropy pool
> needs to better document the type of entropy source it actually
> is. This will be replaced with additional add_*_randomness
> functions in drivers/char/random.c
>
> Who: Robin Getz <rg...@blackfin.uclinux.org>
> & Matt Mackall <m...@selenic.com>
>
> There are 12 remaining uses under drivers/ and 14 more under arch/, the
> rest of the hits look like infrastructure implementing it.
>
> Should I run those files through bother-maintainer.pl and try to get
> people to stop it, or is there a plan underway I don't know about?
I was going to deal with that in the new /dev/random tree; once those
changes go in, IRQF_SAMPLE_RANDOM effectively becomes a no-op. But
I'd prefer that the ordering be that we get the new
sample_interrupt_randomness() changes in first, and then remove the
IRQF_SAMPLE_RANDOM.
I've just been slammed with work, processing patches for the ext4
merge window, and kernel summit planning, and quite frankly, I
considered this to be relatively low priority --- especially since we
no shortage of IRQF_* flag bits, and once the new
sample_interrupt_randomness() goes in, the flag is a complete no-op.
- Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
