On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 12:23:18PM +0200, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: > On 4/13/19 8:44 AM, Richard Henderson wrote: > > On 4/10/19 11:49 PM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: > >>> - if (seed_optarg != NULL) { > >>> - qemu_guest_random_seed_main(seed_optarg, &error_fatal); > >>> + { > >> Since 7be41675f7c we use gnu99 C, so this extra block indentation can be > >> removed. > >> > >>> + Error *err = NULL; > >>> + if (seed_optarg != NULL) { > >>> + qemu_guest_random_seed_main(seed_optarg, &err); > >>> + } else { > >>> + /* ??? Assumes qcrypto is only used by qemu_guest_getrandom. > >>> */ > >>> + qcrypto_init(&err); > >>> + } > >>> + if (err) { > >>> + error_reportf_err(err, "cannot initialize crypto: "); > >>> + exit(1); > >>> + } > >>> } > > > > I could, but it also limits the scope, which is of more importance to > > variables > > who have their address taken. It means that their storage could (in > > theory) be > > shared with objects not overlapping in scope. > > Fine then. > > I think your '???' comment is appropriate but I'd rather let Daniel > opinate. Except that comment, for the rest:
In linux-user context, afaik, the random APIs are the only stuff that will be used, none of the hash or cipher stuff is needed. > > Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <phi...@redhat.com> > Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|