Subject: Re: replace kernel random number function
To: None <tech-security@netbsd.org, tech-kern@netbsd.org>
From: Ignatios Souvatzis <ignatios@theory.cs.uni-bonn.de>
List: tech-kern
Date: 10/23/2000 10:18:16
--tThc/1wpZn/ma/RB
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 10:50:08PM +0200, Hubert Feyrer wrote:
> On 22 Oct 2000, Michael Graff wrote:
> > > Will that give us random(3) -> random(2)?
> >=20
> > No more than we have md5(2)  :)
>=20
> and rijndael_*(2)?
>=20
>=20
> > A syscall for that would be a bad idea.
>=20
> Why - because passing the ammount of data between userland and kernel and
> back is too much overhead?

Partially. Even more: the number of context switches needed for a function
that can be done in userland without problems.

Regards,
	-is

--tThc/1wpZn/ma/RB
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.i

iQEVAgUBOfP0RDCn4om+4LhpAQEeqQf6A/YytDqnFBwdga8rg4KJoCSJwHwvZksS
6W3tQa9YDg1GrFIlLlGk72uQaOs+jsiAWOD0CrO5dPw/aEqZc68LX9zjhX2ZX+MP
iuavc5JWnG1LoDrFFihrJhYM2PYAEl5tOTuMU7QpmP1kc+8fToyvZiX+2SAArg7k
Mdbgy4LhfMSEyX6+zllcCb2nTn6s1KZmnWyGxRD0CT0inVJ+HQH6BPqa8ERvF/S0
QO+z1mEay5VMmivffnvC8sIPRH0XZG3gjmhaVr0ixVQlZHpwVcypSU31KReQdPzY
jTlQ7QK+MHbmH22LfeLCVkDNc5pkNZQVXiRprX1OsWu66NJyZfd3Qg==
=kzaT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--tThc/1wpZn/ma/RB--