Re: [DISCUSSION PATCH 00/41] random: possible ways towards NIST SP800-90B compliance

[Torsten Duwe]

On Fri, Oct 02, 2020 at 03:56:28PM +0200, Stephan Mueller wrote:
> Am Freitag, 2. Oktober 2020, 15:15:55 CEST schrieb Willy Tarreau:
> 
> Hi Willy,
> 
> > > And this is all ???
> > 
> > Possibly a lot of people got used to seeing the numerous versions
> > and are less attentive to new series, it's possible that your message
> > will wake everyone up.
> 
> I think that points to my patch series. My patch series which provide a 
> complete separate, API and ABI compliant drop in replacement of /dev/random, 
> nobody from the gatekeepers cared to even answer. It would not touch the 
> existing code.
> 
> After waiting some time without changing the code (e.g. after Andi Lutomirski 
> commented), I got no answer at all from the gatekeepers, not even any 
> indication in what direction I should move if something was not desired in the 
> patch series.
> 
> Thus I continued adding the features that I think are necessary and for which 
> I received comments from mathematicians. What else should I do?
> 
> With the patch set v35 of my patch series, I see all my goals finally 
> achieved at I expect the code to be stable from here on. The last one was the 
> hardest: to get rid of all non-cryptographic conditioning operations and yet 
> retain performance en par or even superior to the existing /dev/random 
> implementation.

Would you mind to resend it here, for a comparison?

	Torsten