Kyle Hamilton wrote:
My understanding is that if SSL_ERROR_WANT_WRITE happened with
SSL_read(), the next SSL_read() would actually call write() to make
the forward progress.
Yes that is possible, as the data for the write is already inside
OpenSSL library. Infact all the write to BIO/kernel does (in this case)
is push already encrypted data that has been prepared (but was not
written to BIO/kernel) from a previous SSL_write(). It doesn't actually
prepare any new application data for encryption, this is what I called
an attempt to "flush" the data downwards (when I discussed
SSL_shutdown() issues in that bug that has now been fixed).
I suggested the SSL_read() with -1/WANT_WRITE special condition would be
handled the same way as the reverse, since that is an easy way for a new
user to understand.
This situation is also rarer to observe, but easiest to get right.
New users should deal with the SSL_write() with -1/WANT_READ first since
that special condition has a few more caveats to it.
Darryl
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List openssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager majord...@openssl.org
