On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 12:42 PM David Benjamin <david...@google.com> wrote:
> I'm not sure that fix quite works though. If BIO_flush completes > asynchronously (hrm, it's missing an rwstate update), then I believe you'll > be in a state where you *do* want to repeat the init_off / init_num adjust. > You might be able to get away with using init_off/init_num with some minor > tweaks? Another problem: because the fragment headers clobber whatever was > already written, msg_callback sees garbage. Also this function is used for > the unfragmented ChangeCipherSpec, so it's even messier. > > I dunno, this code is too stateful by several orders of magnitude. I think > I'm going to toy with rewriting it now rather than think too hard about the > existing mess. > This still needs to be reviewed, but here's a go at a cleaner version on our end. It passes our test suite, even after modifying it to stress the async write + low MTU case. (And the old code indeed does not.) https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/#/c/6420/ https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/#/c/6421/ David _______________________________________________ openssl-dev mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
