On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 12:17:02PM -0700, Scott Branden wrote: > Thanks for sending out. This looks different than your other patch series. Yes, it mutated in my head as I considered how all of this should hang together, which is why I wanted to get it sent before the weekend. I'm still trying to figure out why the fireware testsuite fails for me, etc. > We should get the first 5 patches accepted now though as they are > simple cleanups and fixes. That will reduce the number of outstanding > patches in the series. Agreed. I'd like to get some more eyes on it, but I can get it ready for -next. > At first glance the issue with the changes after that is the existing > API assumes it has read the whole file and failed if it did not. > Now, if the file is larger than the amount requested there is no indication? The intention is to have old API users unchanged and new users can use a pre-allocated buf (with buf_size) along with file_size to examine their partial read progress. If I broke the old API, that's a bug and I need to fix it, but that's why I wanted to start with the firmware test suite (basic things like module loading work fine after this series, but I wanted to really exercise the corners that the firmware suite pokes at). -- Kees Cook
