Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753018AbWLORab (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Dec 2006 12:30:31 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753014AbWLORab (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Dec 2006 12:30:31 -0500 Received: from 85.8.24.16.se.wasadata.net ([85.8.24.16]:39494 "EHLO smtp.drzeus.cx" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752814AbWLORaa (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Dec 2006 12:30:30 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 365 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Fri, 15 Dec 2006 12:30:30 EST Message-ID: <4582DA4D.70907@drzeus.cx> Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 18:24:29 +0100 From: Pierre Ossman User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (X11/20061027) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Anderson Briglia CC: ext Frank Seidel , Russell King , "Lizardo Anderson (EXT-INdT/Manaus)" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Aguiar Carlos (EXT-INdT/Manaus)" , Tony Lindgren , ext David Brownell Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] Add MMC Password Protection (lock/unlock) support V8: mmc_key_retention.diff References: <20061213155531.1kpbmi3pk40kkoos@webmail.kernalert.de> <45815B3A.1010805@indt.org.br> In-Reply-To: <45815B3A.1010805@indt.org.br> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1436 Lines: 34 Anderson Briglia wrote: > The code was based on code presents at security/keys/user_defined.c. This is the reason of why the MMC PWD code was > implemented using this returns types and others implementations. > That file (user_defined.c) implements generic functions to handle keys inside the kernel, using the Kernel Key Retention > Service. Maybe you can take a look there, :). > That zap variable was used to expand the key payload when a new password exceeded a previous configured size. But the > Kernel Key Retention Service has changed and that zap variable is not used on key_instantiate function implemented at > user_defined.c, anymore. I'll update the MMC PWD code. > > Patches look ok, and I'll commit them once you send me this last fix. > Yes. I believe sizeof is a compiler operation and it does not access the data pointed by that pointer, it access just > the type of the pointer. > > Yes, sizeof() is compile time and completely safe in this regard. Rgds -- -- Pierre Ossman Linux kernel, MMC maintainer http://www.kernel.org PulseAudio, core developer http://pulseaudio.org rdesktop, core developer http://www.rdesktop.org - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/