Skip to content

Rust wrapper: ecc: fix check() return value comment - #11385

Open
holtrop-wolfssl wants to merge 1 commit into
wolfSSL:masterfrom
holtrop-wolfssl:f-12247
Open

Rust wrapper: ecc: fix check() return value comment#11385
holtrop-wolfssl wants to merge 1 commit into
wolfSSL:masterfrom
holtrop-wolfssl:f-12247

Conversation

@holtrop-wolfssl

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Description

Rust wrapper: ecc: fix check() return value comment

Fixes F-12247.

Testing

How did you test?

Checklist

  • added tests
  • updated/added doxygen
  • updated appropriate READMEs
  • Updated manual and documentation

@holtrop-wolfssl holtrop-wolfssl self-assigned this Sep 4, 2026
Copilot AI lite review requested due to automatic review settings September 4, 2026 20:48

Copilot AI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🟢 Approval recommended

The change is a documentation-only correction that aligns with the verified check() signature and implementation.

Pull request overview

This PR corrects the Rust wrapper documentation for ECC::check() in wolfssl-wolfcrypt to match the actual return type and behavior (sanity-checking an ECC key and returning Ok(()) on success or a wolfSSL error code on failure).

Changes:

  • Fixes the ECC::check() Rustdoc “Returns” section to document Result<(), i32> correctly.
File summaries
File Description
wrapper/rust/wolfssl-wolfcrypt/src/ecc.rs Updates ECC::check() return-value documentation to match the function signature and behavior.
Review details
  • Files reviewed: 1/1 changed files
  • Comments generated: 0
  • Review effort level: Lite

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

@holtrop-wolfssl

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

retest this please (Unable to get pull request builder trigger!!)

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.

2 participants