1000544 - mozilla::pkix doesn't use mozilla::pkix::Fail and mozilla::der::Fail consistently

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Core :: Security: PSM, defect)

Description

[Brian Smith (:briansmith, :bsmith, use NEEDINFO?)]

Attachment: use-Fail-more-consistently.patch

If we use Fail() consistently then it is easier to do some debugging because breakpoints set within the Fail() functions will be triggered on the first error detected.

Comment 1

[[:mmc] Monica Chew (no longer reading bugmail)]

Comment on attachment 8411371 [details] [diff] [review]
use-Fail-more-consistently.patch

Review of attachment 8411371 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Seems kind of uncool to me that mozilla::pkix::Fail and mozilla::der::Fail have different signatures, but it's better than before.

Comment 2

[Brian Smith (:briansmith, :bsmith, use NEEDINFO?)]

(In reply to Monica Chew [:mmc] (please use needinfo) from comment #1)
> Comment on attachment 8411371 [details] [diff] [review]
> Seems kind of uncool to me that mozilla::pkix::Fail and mozilla::der::Fail
> have different signatures, but it's better than before.

mozilla::der::Result is a two-valued type (Success vs. Failure) whereas mozilla::pkix::Result is a three-valued type (Success vs. RecoverableError vs. FatalError). I would like to get rid of the RecoverableError vs. FatalError distinction and then merge mozilla::der::Result with mozilla::pkix::result. Then everything would be nice and clean. This is a baby step towards that.

Thanks for the review.

Comment 3

[Brian Smith (:briansmith, :bsmith, use NEEDINFO?)]

https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/146e4f4e985c

Comment 4

[Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM]]

https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/146e4f4e985c