Stefan Berger <[email protected]> wrote:
> From: Stefan Berger <[email protected]>
>
> Detect whether a key is an sm2 type of key by its OID in the parameters
> array rather than assuming that everything under OID_id_ecPublicKey
> is sm2, which is not the case.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Berger <[email protected]>
> Cc: David Howells <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
I presume these cc's are intentionally not on the first patch or the cover (if
there is one)?
Do you have a branch you want me to pull or did you want me to take just
patches 2-4?
David
On 2/1/21 8:23 AM, David Howells wrote:
> Stefan Berger <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> From: Stefan Berger <[email protected]>
>>
>> Detect whether a key is an sm2 type of key by its OID in the parameters
>> array rather than assuming that everything under OID_id_ecPublicKey
>> is sm2, which is not the case.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Stefan Berger <[email protected]>
>> Cc: David Howells <[email protected]>
>> Cc: [email protected]
> I presume these cc's are intentionally not on the first patch or the cover (if
> there is one)?
No, this is not intentional. I guess this is a case of wrong use of cc:
versus mailing lists - my bad. I posted the whole series to
linux-crypto, linux-integrity, keyrings and lkml.
V6 is at least visible here now:
- https://lkml.org/lkml/2021/1/31/323
- https://marc.info/?l=linux-crypto-vger&m=161213604618722&w=2
-
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/[email protected]/T/#mbc9fae5facb4178f64c1145e2654258c0af8fa96
- https://marc.info/?l=linux-keyrings&m=161213608818735&w=2
>
> Do you have a branch you want me to pull or did you want me to take just
> patches 2-4?
Please take it from the mailing list. If there are requests for more
changes on the crypto level, I will send another series. I personally am
waiting for some sort of verdict on the crypto level...
Stefan
On Mon, 2021-02-01 at 09:35 -0500, Stefan Berger wrote:
> On 2/1/21 8:23 AM, David Howells wrote:
> > Stefan Berger <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> From: Stefan Berger <[email protected]>
> >>
> >> Detect whether a key is an sm2 type of key by its OID in the parameters
> >> array rather than assuming that everything under OID_id_ecPublicKey
> >> is sm2, which is not the case.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Stefan Berger <[email protected]>
> >> Cc: David Howells <[email protected]>
> >> Cc: [email protected]
> > I presume these cc's are intentionally not on the first patch or the cover (if
> > there is one)?
>
> No, this is not intentional. I guess this is a case of wrong use of cc:
> versus mailing lists - my bad. I posted the whole series to
> linux-crypto, linux-integrity, keyrings and lkml.
>
> V6 is at least visible here now:
>
> - https://lkml.org/lkml/2021/1/31/323
>
> - https://marc.info/?l=linux-crypto-vger&m=161213604618722&w=2
>
> -
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/[email protected]/T/#mbc9fae5facb4178f64c1145e2654258c0af8fa96
>
> - https://marc.info/?l=linux-keyrings&m=161213608818735&w=2
>
>
>
> >
> > Do you have a branch you want me to pull or did you want me to take just
> > patches 2-4?
>
> Please take it from the mailing list. If there are requests for more
> changes on the crypto level, I will send another series. I personally am
> waiting for some sort of verdict on the crypto level...
The entire patch set should be upstreamed as a single patch set, after
having each of the maintainer's Ack it. In addition, the v6 version is
missing some Reviewed-by tags. (Stefan will re-post a v7 patch set.)
David, I don't have problem with this patch set being upstreamed via
the keys subsystem, assuming it's been tested.
thanks,
Mimi