Re: [Part2 PATCH v6 16/38] crypto: ccp: Implement SEV_PEK_GEN ioctl command

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On 10/23/2017 09:10 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 08:32:57AM -0500, Brijesh Singh wrote:
If both the command fails then we return status from the last command.
IIRC, in my previous patches I was returning status from sev_do_cmd()
instead of sev_platform_shutdown() but based on our previous
communication I thought you asked to return the status from the last
failed command. Did I miss understood ?

So my problem is that it looks strange that you save an error value from
sev_do_cmd() but you don't look at it. And as I said in the other mail,
you should either ignore it and say so in a comment why it is OK to
ignore it or handle it but not overwrite it without looking at it.

Does that make more sense?


I see your point, if both commands failed then I am now inclined towards ignoring the error code from shutdown command and add some comments explaining why its OK. thanks

-Brijesh



[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

  Powered by Linux