Skip to content

Move psa_destroy_key and psa_copy_key to Key Management section #227

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.

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 11, 2019
Merged

Move psa_destroy_key and psa_copy_key to Key Management section #227

merged 1 commit into from
Sep 11, 2019

Conversation

adrianlshaw
Copy link
Contributor

Currently psa_destroy_key and psa_copy_key are in the import/export section but they ought to be in the key management section. So I've simply moved them.

@Patater
Copy link
Contributor

Patater commented Aug 23, 2019

Please rebase on the latest development and update this PR to target the development branch.

@adrianlshaw adrianlshaw changed the base branch from psa-api-1.0-beta to development August 29, 2019 13:10
@Patater
Copy link
Contributor

Patater commented Aug 29, 2019

The commits look a bit weird. Could you squash them into one commit? I don't believe you are trying to make more than one semantic change, so one commit would be the most readable and reviewable.

@Patater Patater added the enhancement New feature or request label Aug 29, 2019
@adrianlshaw
Copy link
Contributor Author

Squashed

@gilles-peskine-arm gilles-peskine-arm added the needs: review The pull request is ready for review. This generally means that it has no known issues. label Sep 6, 2019
Copy link
Collaborator

@gilles-peskine-arm gilles-peskine-arm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Fine, but I'm afraid this needs rebasing again.

@Patater Patater added the needs: work The pull request needs rework before it can be merged. label Sep 10, 2019
@adrianlshaw
Copy link
Contributor Author

Rebased 👍

@gilles-peskine-arm gilles-peskine-arm removed the needs: work The pull request needs rework before it can be merged. label Sep 11, 2019
Copy link
Contributor

@Patater Patater left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@Patater
Copy link
Contributor

Patater commented Sep 11, 2019

CI failure is only files that need updating in Mbed TLS repo concurrently with updating the submodule.

@Patater Patater removed the needs: review The pull request is ready for review. This generally means that it has no known issues. label Sep 11, 2019
@Patater Patater merged commit d93c965 into ARMmbed:development Sep 11, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants