On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 08:47:35AM +0200, Robert Vollmert wrote:
> > On 27. Jun 2019, at 21:03, Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> wrote:
> > Perhaps, but if the reason for the slowness on their first boot was a
> > suboptimal /dev/hwrng source, I would expect it to be equally slow for
> > each boot, since we unconditionally read 64 bytes each time.
> 
> It’s 512 bytes, not that that should fundamentally change anything.

Oh right, my bad. It's been a while...

Anyways, this should either work immediately or fail. Aside from
getrandom(2), which we aren't using here, nothing related to this stuff
should ever block, and if it does then it's a bug we need to work
around.

So, I suggest we add a 1 second timeout to this read.

I can work on that next week.