From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC4BA456DE; Mon, 29 Jul 2024 08:52:19 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CA3140615; Mon, 29 Jul 2024 08:52:19 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail.lysator.liu.se (mail.lysator.liu.se [130.236.254.3]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3122540613 for ; Mon, 29 Jul 2024 08:48:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail.lysator.liu.se (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.lysator.liu.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AE894FBD for ; Mon, 29 Jul 2024 08:48:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail.lysator.liu.se (Postfix, from userid 1004) id 7DF484FBC; Mon, 29 Jul 2024 08:48:01 +0200 (CEST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-13) on hermod.lysator.liu.se X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=disabled version=4.0.0 X-Spam-Score: -1.3 Received: from [192.168.1.86] (h-62-63-215-114.A163.priv.bahnhof.se [62.63.215.114]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail.lysator.liu.se (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 739474F4F; Mon, 29 Jul 2024 08:47:58 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <7d5f1b04-2711-4732-88a6-006e3f67f294@lysator.liu.se> Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2024 08:47:58 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] eal: add support for TRNG with Arm RNG feature To: Wathsala Wathawana Vithanage , Shunzhi Wen , "thomas@monjalon.net" , =?UTF-8?Q?Mattias_R=C3=B6nnblom?= , Ruifeng Wang , Bruce Richardson , Tyler Retzlaff , Min Zhou , David Christensen , Stanislaw Kardach , Konstantin Ananyev Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , nd , Jack Bond-Preston , Dhruv Tripathi , Honnappa Nagarahalli References: <20240723212703.721050-1-shunzhi.wen@arm.com> <536d1325-ee15-4630-9ae9-00cef9411d34@lysator.liu.se> <2d28f42f-480b-4070-8ba2-1353a742b46d@lysator.liu.se> <5d409e6a-1d61-4d8a-b9ab-8cbcf7838ad0@lysator.liu.se> <298cc5e7-bb47-46a9-a904-c583edff7daa@lysator.liu.se> Content-Language: en-US From: =?UTF-8?Q?Mattias_R=C3=B6nnblom?= In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org On 2024-07-29 08:34, Wathsala Wathawana Vithanage wrote: >> ...to have a non-zero chance of getting accepted. >> > > I see too much uncertainty in that statement with "non-zero chance". As the maintainer > of this library and someone with the community's best interest in mind, can you outline > the requirements for a rte_csrand implementation with a higher degree of confidence? > > I want to know the criteria that must be satisfied for the acceptance probability to be > close to 1. I'm sorry if I have not been abundantly clear on the requirements that I thought > you would look for in such a patch. Maybe I misread your previous email. > Without a rationale why rte_csrand() functionality is something that should be in DPDK, and a rationale why the ARM CPU CSRNG is superior to getentropy(), it doesn't really matter how the patch set looks like. I've repeatedly asked for this information, and you've repeatedly ignored it. This does not further your cause. >> >> That's circular. "The reason we want this feature implementation to be >> included is to satisfy those who want this feature implementation." >> >> Stop thinking like an ARM developer on a "software enablement" mission, and >> start thinking like a DPDK library or application developer. > > We all think different in one way or the other, but what's more important is finding a > common ground.