From: Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
levitte> Well found bug, but incorrect correction, because your patch will
levitte> still not clear a set bit (as one would expect if you gave the value 0
levitte> for a bit number that was early given the value 1).
While I looked at this, I noticed this function is quite inefficient
when trying to figure out if more memory is needed. Not the
allocation bit itself, but rather that it will count down length when
the last bytes are 0, and thereby lose all info on how much memory it
has really allocated, which means that there's a potential unneeded
OPENSSL_realloc() happening in the next few calls if the next n is
larger than the current length*8.
--
Richard Levitte \ Spannv�gen 38, II \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Redakteur@Stacken \ S-168 35 BROMMA \ T: +46-8-26 52 47
\ SWEDEN \ or +46-733-72 88 11
Procurator Odiosus Ex Infernis -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Member of the OpenSSL development team: http://www.openssl.org/
Software Engineer, GemPlus: http://www.gemplus.com/
Unsolicited commercial email is subject to an archival fee of $400.
See <http://www.stacken.kth.se/~levitte/mail/> for more info.
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
