From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A7F0C47088 for ; Thu, 1 Dec 2022 16:58:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229897AbiLAQ6r (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Dec 2022 11:58:47 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:49556 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229739AbiLAQ6q (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Dec 2022 11:58:46 -0500 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E0AB39F4AC; Thu, 1 Dec 2022 08:58:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098399.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 2B1GmhNE010439; Thu, 1 Dec 2022 16:58:29 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=message-id : subject : from : reply-to : to : cc : date : in-reply-to : references : content-type : mime-version : content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=pj58WVXXNN609Xhw996yx5QlHJylHM682FuOaw78+cA=; b=HmfjuEQEFBQRViBfY4yvfQXkknQbsqcXuhcuhyIsXy5c4FuC6rEgxfXBelPbkFSJiKg0 2AMDZgDCgfrVEvVog1BIlknly5yOwSB2CrXHJ+mzGB7qnTCoL5SzYwfoWH+t/P+w4JC0 prjCv42breooTvrrfSrYbXk8aDhqHbbQ4pwZhdLZZ7Brm9K7nR5PTfeBhGLS2lDb+1VJ xDle6zr1Jfv5vv4MJg5UoAvFKeh5tECh2YnZNSe0TujloQFa8aP7tCBFkHI20EoPfkAH 7hBOZIXYUiJQ9AN2hunwv7EUYjZOU3h1/cgoNxYwRq/Df1rugovCjoCWPTjnFZJGgKm2 qw== Received: from ppma02dal.us.ibm.com (a.bd.3ea9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.62.189.10]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3m7049g6x0-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 01 Dec 2022 16:58:28 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma02dal.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma02dal.us.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 2B1Go4df008135; Thu, 1 Dec 2022 16:58:27 GMT Received: from smtprelay06.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com ([9.208.129.118]) by ppma02dal.us.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3m3aea50xq-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 01 Dec 2022 16:58:27 +0000 Received: from smtpav04.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav04.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com [10.39.53.231]) by smtprelay06.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 2B1GwQvn47972664 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 1 Dec 2022 16:58:26 GMT Received: from smtpav04.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B49158068; Thu, 1 Dec 2022 16:58:26 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav04.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id A93EE58050; Thu, 1 Dec 2022 16:58:24 +0000 (GMT) Received: from rhel-laptop.ibm.com (unknown [9.160.99.100]) by smtpav04.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 1 Dec 2022 16:58:24 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <1067c2c05bdbc8c11ef91cf2ba56445ad4ba4673.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] block: sed-opal: keyring support for SED keys From: Greg Joyce Reply-To: gjoyce@linux.vnet.ibm.com To: Ben Boeckel Cc: Hannes Reinecke , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, jonathan.derrick@linux.dev, brking@linux.vnet.ibm.com, msuchanek@suse.de, mpe@ellerman.id.au, nayna@linux.ibm.com, axboe@kernel.dk, akpm@linux-foundation.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2022 10:58:24 -0600 In-Reply-To: References: <20221129232506.3735672-1-gjoyce@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20221129232506.3735672-4-gjoyce@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <2133c00e5e7c53c458dbb709204c955bac8bee88.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <044c90dc7feb3959b5740154addc230ba9a57216.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5 (3.28.5-18.el8) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: ICqBmfOIUzWSlQWRRm8rcbB4Kpnrcoad X-Proofpoint-GUID: ICqBmfOIUzWSlQWRRm8rcbB4Kpnrcoad X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.219,Aquarius:18.0.923,Hydra:6.0.545,FMLib:17.11.122.1 definitions=2022-12-01_12,2022-12-01_01,2022-06-22_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 bulkscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 suspectscore=0 priorityscore=1501 adultscore=0 malwarescore=0 mlxscore=0 phishscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2210170000 definitions=main-2212010123 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2022-12-01 at 11:12 -0500, Ben Boeckel wrote: > On Thu, Dec 01, 2022 at 09:29:36 -0600, Greg Joyce wrote: > > On Wed, 2022-11-30 at 22:46 -0500, Ben Boeckel wrote: > > > Perhaps naming it `OPAL_MAX_KEY_LEN` would help clarify this? > > > > I'm not averse to changing it because it would be clearer. My > > concern > > is that it's been OPAL_KEY_MAX for 5+ years (the original SED Opal > > commit). Unless there is strong consensus to change it, I'm going > > to > > leave it as the original name. > > I don't care about the name (very much in the peanut gallery), just > it > not being a magic number :) . > > --Ben Now I get you! I think that you mean changing to this: if (ret > 0) { if (ret > sizeof(key->key_len)) { ret = -ENOSPC; goto error; } key->key_len = ret; key->key_type = OPAL_INCLUDED; }