[PATCH v7 0/3] hwrng: add hwrng support for Rockchip RK3568

[Chen-Yu Tsai]

On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 4:22 PM Diederik de Haas <didi.debian at cknow.org> wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, 17 July 2024 04:58:51 CEST Chen-Yu Tsai wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 10:25 AM Daniel Golle <daniel at makrotopia.org> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 16, 2024 at 07:19:35PM +0200, Diederik de Haas wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, 16 July 2024 18:53:43 CEST Diederik de Haas wrote:
> > > > > rngtest: FIPS 140-2(2001-10-10) Long run: 0
> > > >
> > > > I don't know if it means something, but I noticed that I have
> > > > ``Long run: 0`` with all my poor results,
> > > > while Chen-Yu had ``Long run: 1``.
> > > >
> > > > Different SoC (RK3399), but Anand had ``Long run: 0`` too on their
> > > > very poor result (100% failure):
> > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-rockchip/CANAwSgTTzZOwBaR9zjJ5VMpxm5BydtW6
> > > > rB2S7jg+dnoX8hAoWg at mail.gmail.com/>
> > > The conclusions I draw from that rather ugly situation are:
> > >  - The hwrng should not be enabled by default, but it should by done
> > >
> > >    for each board on which it is known to work well.
> > >
> > >  - RK_RNG_SAMPLE_CNT as well as the assumed rng quality should be
> > >
> > >    defined in DT for each board:
> > >    * introduce new 'rochchip,rng-sample-count' property
> > >    * read 'quality' property already used for timeriomem_rng
> > >
> > > I will prepare a follow-up patch taking those conclusions into account.
> > >
> > > Just for completeness, here my test result on the NanoPi R5C:
> > > root at OpenWrt:~# cat /dev/hwrng | rngtest -c 1000
> > > rngtest 6.15
> > > Copyright (c) 2004 by Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
> > > This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.  There is NO
> > > warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR
> > > PURPOSE.
> > >
> > > rngtest: starting FIPS tests...
> > > rngtest: bits received from input: 20000032
> > > rngtest: FIPS 140-2 successes: 875
> > > rngtest: FIPS 140-2 failures: 125
> > > rngtest: FIPS 140-2(2001-10-10) Monobit: 123
> > > rngtest: FIPS 140-2(2001-10-10) Poker: 5
> > > rngtest: FIPS 140-2(2001-10-10) Runs: 4
> > > rngtest: FIPS 140-2(2001-10-10) Long run: 0
> > > rngtest: FIPS 140-2(2001-10-10) Continuous run: 0
> > > rngtest: input channel speed: (min=85.171; avg=141.102;
> > > max=4882812.500)Kibits/s rngtest: FIPS tests speed: (min=17.809;
> > > avg=19.494; max=60.169)Mibits/s rngtest: Program run time: 139628605
> > > microseconds
> >
> > I doubt this is per-board. The RNG is inside the SoC, so it could be a chip
> > quality thing.
>
> I agree with ChenYu (and others) that this is isn't a per-board level thing.
> I'd even go further: 's/I doubt/It can't be that/' (for the same reason
> though; this is inside the SoC).
>
> Before I saw these latest emails, I was going to suggest:
> 1. Enable it only on RK3568 for now. I would be fine if this would be accepted
> by the maintainer
>
> 2. Ask that you make a special version (for me) where I could play with the
> params without having to compile a new kernel for each variant (it generally
> takes me more then 24h on my Q64-A). Either through kernel module properties
> or properties defined in the DeviceTree is fine with me.
>
> 3. Based on the results make  a choice to not enable it on rk3566 at all or
> (indeed) introduce DT properties to configure it differently per SoC.
>
> 4. Hope/Ask for more test results
>
> > On the RK3399 we also saw wildly varying results.
>
> On my Rock64('s) (RK3328) it doesn't work at all:
>
> ```
> root at cs21:~# cat /dev/hwrng | rngtest -c 1000
> rngtest 5
> ...
> rngtest: starting FIPS tests...
> cat: /dev/hwrng: No such device
> rngtest: entropy source drained
> ```

RK3399 and RK3328 are covered by a different driver:

https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230707115242.3411259-1-clabbe@baylibre.com/

And that patch says the TRNG on the RK3328 is utterly broken.


ChenYu


> Cheers,
>   Diederik