lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Dec]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] keys, trusted: seal with a policy
On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 01:34:35PM +1100, James Morris wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Nov 2015, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 11:21:01AM +1100, James Morris wrote:
> > > On Tue, 17 Nov 2015, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > >
> > > > }
> > > > break;
> > > > + case Opt_policydigest:
> > > > + if (!tpm2 ||
> > > > + strlen(args[0].from) != (2 * opt->digest_len))
> > > > + return -EINVAL;
> > > > + kfree(opt->policydigest);
> > > > + opt->policydigest = kzalloc(opt->digest_len,
> > > > + GFP_KERNEL);
> > >
> > > Is it correct to kfree opt->policydigest here before allocating it?
> >
> > I think so. The same option might be encountered multiple times.
>
> This would surely signify an error?

I'm following the semantics of other options. That's why I implemented
it that way for example:

keyctl add trusted kmk "new 32 keyhandle=0x80000000 keyhandle=0x80000000"

is perfectly OK. I just thought that it'd be more odd if this option
behaved in a different way...

> --
> James Morris
> <jmorris@namei.org>

/Jarkko


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-12-07 10:21    [W:0.143 / U:0.308 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site