From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 15:28:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 15:28:36 -0400 Received: from shed.alex.org.uk ([195.224.53.219]:61401 "HELO shed.alex.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 15:28:30 -0400 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 20:28:41 +0100 From: Alex Bligh - linux-kernel Reply-To: Alex Bligh - linux-kernel To: Francois Romieu , rml@tech9.net Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alex Bligh - linux-kernel Subject: Re: [PATCH] Optionally let Net Devices feed Entropy Message-ID: <212453020.997993720@[169.254.45.213]> In-Reply-To: <20010816190255.A17095@se1.cogenit.fr> In-Reply-To: <20010816190255.A17095@se1.cogenit.fr> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.0b3 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >> What is experimental about it? > > The implicit-and-should-be-debated-in-2.5 assumption that the entropy > estimate still makes sense ? As opposed to the huge amount of sense it currently makes to collect it depending on your NIC manufacturer, as opposed to dependent upon a config option? If you mean that the option should be labelled 'not for the paranoid' I agree. The patch does that. 'Experimental' means the code may crash, or perform other than as advertized. -- Alex Bligh