On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 03:39:56PM -0400, Sweet Tea Dorminy wrote:
> @@ -231,14 +221,39 @@ static int setup_per_mode_enc_key(struct fscrypt_info *ci,
> memzero_explicit(mode_key, mode->keysize);
> if (err)
> goto out_unlock;
> -done_unlock:
> - ci->ci_enc_key = *prep_key;
> - err = 0;
> +
> out_unlock:
The 'if (err)' block above is no longer needed.
> +static int find_mode_prepared_key(struct fscrypt_info *ci,
> + struct fscrypt_master_key *mk,
> + struct fscrypt_prepared_key *keys,
> + u8 hkdf_context, bool include_fs_uuid)
> +{
> + struct fscrypt_mode *mode = ci->ci_mode;
> + const u8 mode_num = mode - fscrypt_modes;
> + struct fscrypt_prepared_key *prep_key;
> + int err;
> +
> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(mode_num > FSCRYPT_MODE_MAX))
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + prep_key = &keys[mode_num];
> + if (fscrypt_is_key_prepared(prep_key, ci)) {
> + ci->ci_enc_key = *prep_key;
> + return 0;
> + }
> + err = setup_new_mode_prepared_key(mk, prep_key, ci, hkdf_context,
> + include_fs_uuid);
> + if (err)
> + return err;
> +
> + ci->ci_enc_key = *prep_key;
> + return 0;
> +}
It actually should be find_or_create_mode_prepared_key(), right? It's confusing
to have a function that just says "find" actually create the thing it is looking
for.
But, with how long these function names would get, maybe we should just stick
with setup_mode_prepared_key()? Note that it has the same semantics (find or
create) as fscrypt_setup_ino_hash_key(), which this patchset doesn't change.
- Eric
|