From: Stephan Mueller <smueller@chronox.de>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Paul Menzel <pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de>
Cc: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: jitterentropy: `jent_mod_init()` takes 17 ms
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 10:45:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <23252091.ssLaC8jLEa@tauon.chronox.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a422b262-3923-0d29-1a11-3498724a98ad@molgen.mpg.de>
Am Dienstag, 10. November 2020, 10:37:02 CET schrieb Paul Menzel:
Hi Paul,
> Dear Stephan,
>
>
> Thank you for the quick reply.
>
> Am 10.11.20 um 10:25 schrieb Stephan Mueller:
> > Am Montag, 9. November 2020, 20:31:02 CET schrieb Paul Menzel:
> >> By mistake I built `XFRM_ESP` into the Linux kernel, resulting in
> >>
> >> CONFIG_CRYPTO_SEQIV=y
> >> CONFIG_CRYPTO_ECHAINIV=y
> >>
> >> and also the Jitterentropy RNG to be built in.
> >>
> >> CRYPTO_JITTERENTROPY=y
> >>
> >> So, on the Asus F2A85-M PRO starting Linux 4.10-rc3 with
> >> `initcall_debug`, the init method is run unconditionally, and it takes
> >> 17.5 ms, which is over ten percent of the overall 900 ms the Linux
> >
> > Hm, 17.5 / 900 = 2%, or am I missing something?
>
> Indeed, that is embarrassing. My bad.
>
> >> kernel needs until loading the init process.
> >>
> >> [ 0.300544] calling jent_mod_init+0x0/0x2c @ 1
> >> [ 0.318438] initcall jent_mod_init+0x0/0x2c returned 0 after
> >> 17471 usecs
> >>
> >> Looking at the output of systemd-bootchart, it looks like, that this
> >> indeed delayed the boot a little, as the other init methods seem to be
> >> ordered after it.
> >>
> >> I am now building it as a module, but am wondering if the time can be
> >> reduced to below ten milliseconds.
> >
> > What you see is the test whether the Jitter RNG has a proper noise source.
> > The function jent_entropy_init() is the cause of the operation. It
> > performs 1024 times a test to validate the appropriateness of the noise
> > source. You can adjust that with the TESTLOOPCOUNT in this function. But
> > I am not sure adjusting is a wise course of action.
>
> Out of curiosity, why 1024 and not, for example, 128 or 2048? Is there
> some statistics behind it?
See [1] section 4.3 bullet 4 is the culprit. The startup test includes the
referenced test logic.
[1] https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.SP.800-90B.pdf
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Paul
Ciao
Stephan
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-10 9:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-09 19:31 Paul Menzel
2020-11-10 9:25 ` Stephan Mueller
2020-11-10 9:37 ` Paul Menzel
2020-11-10 9:45 ` Stephan Mueller [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=23252091.ssLaC8jLEa@tauon.chronox.de \
--to=smueller@chronox.de \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®