On 03/09/2015 04:38, Salz, Rich wrote:
We are considering a big cleanup to the memory-allocation API’s in the
next release.
Please take a look at the attached documentation, which describes
**ALL** of the public functions, and let us know if it will cause a
problem.
A few practical notes:
1. I trust that functions to allocate specific data
types (such as bignums) are not changed by this.
2. Macros that take zero arguments (such as
"OPENSSL_malloc_init()") are not accepted by all
compilers. In my own API designs this has forced
me to give such macros a dummy argument (which is
never used, it just pleases the preprocessor).
3. When compiling without compile-time debug flags,
the various debug arguments should not be passed
(or otherwise referenced) by the macros, avoiding
a bunch of "foo.c" and line number values from
filling up the compiled binary. Something like
#ifdef SOME_DEBUG_DEFINE
#define OPENSSL_malloc(num) (CRYPTO_malloc(num, __FILE__, __LINE__))
...
#else
#define OPENSSL_malloc(num) (CRYPTO_malloc(num, NULL, 0))
// OR
#define OPENSSL_malloc(num) (CRYPTO_malloc_nodbg(num))
...
#endif
4. For the basic functions (not the callbacks), there
seems to be no reason not to change to size_t now.
5. Given the huge number of backward incompatibilities
in OpenSSL 1.1.x, this seems a good time to change to
size_t in the callbacks too.
6. Maybe there should be an alternate get/set_mem_functions
with non-linenumber callbacks (behind the scenes, either
would set the the other callbacks to stubs that add/remove
the extra args, the initial defaults would be direct for
speed and to support the "defer to default implementation"
scenarios).
7. Maybe the get/set_mem_functions should (in their debug
variant) should also be able to change the backend for
debug_push/_pop.
8. For readability, defines with omitted (opaque)
definitions should be documented with elided args such
as #define OPENSSL_malloc(num) ... and
#define CRYPTO_MEM_CHECK_ON 0x... to indicate that they
do not (typically) expand to nothing/typically do expand
to a numeric constant
9. Typo: "pointers for with the current functions"
10. It would be helpful to clarify which older functions are
getting removed. It's a bit like reading a patch without
the removed lines. Kind of impossible to tell what you
propose to remove.
Enjoy (NOT A CONTRIBUTION)
Jakob
--
Jakob Bohm, CIO, Partner, WiseMo A/S. http://www.wisemo.com
Transformervej 29, 2860 Søborg, Denmark. Direct +45 31 13 16 10
This public discussion message is non-binding and may contain errors.
WiseMo - Remote Service Management for PCs, Phones and Embedded
_______________________________________________
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users
