Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2019 18:42:10 -0800 From: "Simon J. Gerraty" <sjg@juniper.net> To: <cem@freebsd.org> Cc: "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <arch@freebsd.org>, <sjg@juniper.net> Subject: Re: Killing RANDOM_LOADABLE? Message-ID: <95398.1575254530@kaos.jnpr.net> In-Reply-To: <CAG6CVpXyo_BKhYVDzV_=D90kTkpFtpYOmpFa0S6XuXtn%2B5wpFw@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAG6CVpXFjxUxKL6Bb3Gw1Krdo4PkUPBjCnnG5hrDcr39aoF=zQ@mail.gmail.com> <40710.1575238505@kaos.jnpr.net> <CAG6CVpXyo_BKhYVDzV_=D90kTkpFtpYOmpFa0S6XuXtn%2B5wpFw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Conrad Meyer <cem@freebsd.org> wrote: > I appreciate the quick feedback, thanks. The algorithm/ internals aren= =E2=80=99t > too important for me; I=E2=80=99m interested in what your minimal api nee= ds from > FreeBSD are. >=20 > It sounds like you select the random module to load in loader(8) =E2=80= =94 you > don=E2=80=99t need userspace / runtime loading (kldload). Is that underst= anding > correct? Per my followup, we are no longer using RANDOM_LOADABLE, we preload the selected module. So long as that functionality is not broken we should be ok. > Would it be possible to answer the other questions from the initial email, > too? If random loadable support was removed upstream, are you unable to Since we haven't used it for a couple of years I'd hope we would not be impacted but I know we've been bitten in the past by changes in the random infra, though I don't recall the detail - will check with some other folk.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?95398.1575254530>