Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-crypto+bounces-2630-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 17:18:45 +0200
Message-Id: <CZRVET5930A0.3KM5Q2BAH05LT@kernel.org>
Cc: "open list:SECURITY SUBSYSTEM" <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
 "David Howells" <dhowells@redhat.com>, "David Woodhouse"
 <dwmw2@infradead.org>, "herbert@gondor.apana.org.au"
 <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>, "davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
 "Ard Biesheuvel" <ardb@kernel.org>, "paul@paul-moore.com"
 <paul@paul-moore.com>, "jmorris@namei.org" <jmorris@namei.org>,
 "serge@hallyn.com" <serge@hallyn.com>, "zohar@linux.ibm.com"
 <zohar@linux.ibm.com>, "roberto.sassu@huawei.com"
 <roberto.sassu@huawei.com>, "dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com"
 <dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com>, "mic@digikod.net" <mic@digikod.net>,
 "casey@schaufler-ca.com" <casey@schaufler-ca.com>, "stefanb@linux.ibm.com"
 <stefanb@linux.ibm.com>, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org"
 <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "keyrings@vger.kernel.org"
 <keyrings@vger.kernel.org>, "linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org"
 <linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org>, "linux-efi@vger.kernel.org"
 <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>, "linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org"
 <linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/8] certs: Introduce ability to link to a system
 key
From: "Jarkko Sakkinen" <jarkko@kernel.org>
To: "Eric Snowberg" <eric.snowberg@oracle.com>
References: <20240311161111.3268190-1-eric.snowberg@oracle.com>
 <20240311161111.3268190-2-eric.snowberg@oracle.com>
 <CZR5W1VPAVJC.2VZOSD53YNT9I@kernel.org>
 <77AE4DEA-9474-44A1-88DC-852523C36797@oracle.com>
In-Reply-To: <77AE4DEA-9474-44A1-88DC-852523C36797@oracle.com>

On Mon Mar 11, 2024 at 11:31 PM EET, Eric Snowberg wrote:
>
>
> > On Mar 11, 2024, at 1:18=E2=80=AFPM, Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org=
> wrote:
> >=20
> > On Mon Mar 11, 2024 at 6:11 PM EET, Eric Snowberg wrote:
> >> + return -1;
> >=20
> > Missed this one: why a magic number?
>
> Good point, I'll change this to return -ENOKEY.  Thanks.

Either that or a boolean function, which ever fits to the overall
flow better... The upside of error code is less branching in the call
sites. The upside of boolean is that caller exactly knows all the
values that ever should come out as a result.

Your choice ofc.

BR, Jarkko