On 12/13/21 11:06 AM, Nicolai Stange wrote: > Hannes Reinecke <hare@xxxxxxx> writes: > >> On 12/9/21 10:03 AM, Nicolai Stange wrote: >>> diff --git a/crypto/dh_helper.c b/crypto/dh_helper.c >>> index aabc91e4f63f..9f21204e5dee 100644 >>> --- a/crypto/dh_helper.c >>> +++ b/crypto/dh_helper.c >>> @@ -45,18 +72,24 @@ int crypto_dh_encode_key(char *buf, unsigned int len, const struct dh *params) >>> .type = CRYPTO_KPP_SECRET_TYPE_DH, >>> .len = len >>> }; >>> + int group_id; >>> >>> if (unlikely(!len)) >>> return -EINVAL; >>> >>> ptr = dh_pack_data(ptr, end, &secret, sizeof(secret)); >>> + group_id = (int)params->group_id; >>> + ptr = dh_pack_data(ptr, end, &group_id, sizeof(group_id)); >> >> Me being picky again. >> To my knowledge, 'int' doesn't have a fixed width, but is rather only >> guaranteed to hold certain values. >> So as soon as one relies on any fixed size (as this one does) I tend to >> use fixed size type like 'u32' to make it absolutely clear what is to be >> expected here. >> >> But the I don't know the conventions in the crypto code; if an 'int' is >> assumed to be 32 bits throughout the crypto code I guess we should be fine. > > Yes, I thought about this, too. However, the other, already existing > fields like ->key_size and ->p_size are getting serialized as unsigned > ints and I decided to stick to that for ->group_id as well. Except for > the testmgr vectors, the encoding is internal to the > crypto_dh_encode_key() and crypto_dh_decode_key() pair anyway -- all > that would happen if sizeof(int) != 4 is that the tests would fail. > > So, IMO, making the serialization of struct dh to use u32 throughout is > not really in scope for this series and would probably deserve a patch > on its own, if desired. > As I thought. So that's okay, then. Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@xxxxxxx> Cheers, Hannes -- Dr. Hannes Reinecke Kernel Storage Architect hare@xxxxxxx +49 911 74053 688 SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg HRB 36809 (AG Nürnberg), GF: Felix Imendörffer
