Mat Martineau <mathew.j.martin...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > The interface for the active ops is a bit clunky as the syscall interface
> > doesn't provide sufficient argument space to pass everything I need to
> > specify. Some basic integer arguments are specified in a struct and more
> > complex options through a string of key=val pairs - just so I don't have to
> > deal with the compat code for dealing with a struct containing pointers
> > (but I can change to that if it's preferable).
>
> It sounds like the struct would still have pointers to strings that would
> need parsing,
It doesn't:
struct keyctl_pkey_params {
__s32 key_id;
__s32 password_id;
__u32 data_len;
__u32 enc_len;
__u32 __spare[4];
};
because I have sufficient syscall arguments to pass four pointers - the struct
above, one info string and two buffer pointers.
> so I'm not sure it's that much overhead to handle the short
> strings of key=val pairs. But I'll agree that it feels clunky.
... fixes applied ...
> > + info->supported_ops = KEYCTL_SUPPORTS_VERIFY;
>
> Did you intend to include encrypt/decrypt/sign here?
When they're implemented there.
David
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
