2016-11-24 14:33 GMT+03:00 David Howells <dhowells@xxxxxxxxxx>: > Andrey Ryabinin <ryabinin.a.a@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > David Howells <dhowells@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > >> >> + if (!rp) { >> >> + if (mpi_resize(res, 1) < 0) >> > >> > This is better done with RESIZE_IF_NEEDED(). >> > >> >> mpi_resize() is equal to RESIZE_IF_NEEDED(), it also checks for allocated space: >> >> int mpi_resize(MPI a, unsigned nlimbs) >> { >> .... >> if (nlimbs <= a->alloced) >> return 0; /* no need to do it */ > > Hmmm... In that case, should your patch use mpi_resize() rather than > RESIZE_IF_NEEDED()? It's a trivial case that we should perhaps weed out much > earlier (ie. reject the key if exp<2 or mod<2), but it would make the object > file slightly smaller not to do the test twice. > Right, it could be mpi_resize(). I realized that these two functions do the exactly the same thing only after I send the patch. We could even remove RESIZE_IF_NEEDED() to not confuse people, because currently it has no users. > David -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html