On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 01:14:52PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > In spite of that, I have a slight preference for this version, given > that it makes it obvious that we bail on two separate conditions: > - an error has occurred > - no error has occurred but the resulting walk is empty > > Testing walk.nbytes only needlessly obfuscates the code, as we need to > return 'err' in the end anyway. I disagree, this is how most skcipher walkers are structured, they never explicitly test on err and only terminate the loop when walk->nbytes hits zero, in which case err is returned as is. I don't see why this particular skcipher walker should deviate from that paradigm. In fact it is exactly that deviation that caused the bug in the first instance. Cheers, -- Email: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
