Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Correct readability-non-const-parameter warning #444

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Nov 5, 2017
Merged

Correct readability-non-const-parameter warning #444

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
a31b032
Correct readability-non-const-parameter warning
Nov 2, 2017
67121d3
Double const
Nov 5, 2017
d75f11f
Merge branch 'master' into warn2
Nov 5, 2017
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion encfs/SSL_Cipher.cpp
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -505,7 +505,7 @@ CipherKey SSL_Cipher::newRandomKey() {
compute a 64-bit check value for the data using HMAC.
*/
static uint64_t _checksum_64(SSLKey *key, const unsigned char *data,
int dataLen, uint64_t *const chainedIV) {
int dataLen, const uint64_t *chainedIV) {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

const uint64_t *const chainedIV ?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Any reason why we need a *const here ?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just as a security, to be sure not to accidentally modify chainedIV pointer later in the function's code ?
Which is not the case actually.
Thx 👍

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes. More const is more better, right?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Your commit does two things:

  1. It makes one variable const (the variable chainedIV points to)
  2. Makes another non-const (the pointer itself).
    I agree with (1) but I don't understand (2).

rAssert(dataLen > 0);
Lock lock(key->mutex);

Expand Down