refactor: cleanup prf header #5144
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
lrstewart
requested review from
goatgoose,
CarolYeh910 and
maddeleine
and removed request for
goatgoose
maddeleine
reviewed
Feb 26, 2025
CarolYeh910
approved these changes
Feb 26, 2025
maddeleine
approved these changes
Feb 26, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Release Summary:
Resolved issues:
related to #5143
Description of changes:
While poking around in the PRF logic, the clutter made understanding the already complicated flow even more complicated. The header contained many internal implementation details only required by the tests, which made figuring out how the rest of the code interacted with the PRF more difficult.
This change is purely renames + moving around declarations. The end result is a much simpler s2n_prf.h.
Call-outs:
I also renamed a couple methods that didn't start with "s2n_prf". The mix of "s2n_tls_prf" and "s2n_prf" made me think there was a meaningful difference. There was not.
Testing:
No behavior changes, purely cosmetic. Existing tests should continue to pass.
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.