Skip to content

patch for WC_PK_TYPE_EC_CHECK_PUB_KEY enum missing in wolfSSL 5.9.2 - #178

Open
JacobBarthelmeh wants to merge 1 commit into
wolfSSL:masterfrom
JacobBarthelmeh:wolfhsm
Open

patch for WC_PK_TYPE_EC_CHECK_PUB_KEY enum missing in wolfSSL 5.9.2#178
JacobBarthelmeh wants to merge 1 commit into
wolfSSL:masterfrom
JacobBarthelmeh:wolfhsm

Conversation

@JacobBarthelmeh

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

No description provided.

Copilot AI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🟡 Changes recommended

The added patch appears incomplete for wh_client_crypto.c because it guards response helpers but leaves other references to the missing WC_PK_TYPE_EC_* request types unguarded, which can still break builds with wolfSSL 5.9.2.

Once you've addressed the issues Copilot identified, you can request another Copilot review.

Pull request overview

This PR updates the wolfHSM 1.5.0 Yocto recipe to apply a compatibility patch so wolfHSM can be staged/compiled against the layer’s wolfSSL 5.9.2, which lacks newer ECC crypto-callback request types used by wolfHSM 1.5.0.

Changes:

  • Add a new recipe patch to the wolfHSM 1.5.0 SRC_URI.
  • Introduce a wolfHSM source patch that conditionally compiles out ECC make-public / check-public-key crypto-callback paths when building against wolfSSL 5.9.2 or older.
File summaries
File Description
recipes-wolfssl/wolfhsm/wolfhsm_1.5.0.bb Adds the new compatibility patch to SRC_URI with rationale.
recipes-wolfssl/wolfhsm/files/0001-Guard-the-ECC-public-key-cryptocb-paths-on-the-wolfSSL-version.patch Adds preprocessor guards around wolfHSM’s ECC public-key cryptocb-related code for older wolfSSL versions.
Review details
  • Files reviewed: 2/2 changed files
  • Comments generated: 1
  • Review effort level: Lite

💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants