Hi,
On Wed, 20 Dec 2000, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
> From: Bodo Moeller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> moeller> On Tue, Dec 19, 2000 at 09:02:45PM +0100, Ulf Moeller wrote:
> moeller>
> moeller> > Is it really a good idea to put this into the stable branch?
> moeller>
> moeller> In the la
On Wed, Dec 20, 2000 at 12:01:13PM +0100, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
Obtain lock CRYPTO_LOCK_RSA before creating BN_MONT_CTX
structures and setting rsa->_method_mod_{n,p,q}.
>>> Is it really a good idea to put this into the stable branch?
>> In the later version (where l
From: Bodo Moeller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
moeller> On Tue, Dec 19, 2000 at 09:02:45PM +0100, Ulf Moeller wrote:
moeller>
moeller> >> Obtain lock CRYPTO_LOCK_RSA before creating BN_MONT_CTX
moeller> >> structures and setting rsa->_method_mod_{n,p,q}.
moeller>
moeller> > Is it really a good idea
On Tue, Dec 19, 2000 at 09:02:45PM +0100, Ulf Moeller wrote:
>> Obtain lock CRYPTO_LOCK_RSA before creating BN_MONT_CTX
>> structures and setting rsa->_method_mod_{n,p,q}.
> Is it really a good idea to put this into the stable branch?
In the later version (where locks are only held during t
f Thorpe [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2000 7:38 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: cvs commit: openssl/crypto/rsa rsa_eay.c
>
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 20 Dec 2000, Reddie, Steven wrote:
>
> > The problem with only locking during the
Geoff touches on (actually, implies :) some good points.
Again, I want to point interested folks to the following:
http://gatekeeper.dec.com/pub/DEC/SRC/research-reports/abstracts/src-rr-035.html
Written by Andrew Birrell in 1989, 35 highly readable pages. The abstract:
This paper provides a
Hi,
On Wed, 20 Dec 2000, Reddie, Steven wrote:
> The problem with only locking during the assignment is that potentially
> mutliple threads will be doing [extensive] work that will be thrown away
> when they discover that another thread beat them to it. The result could be
> that the lock is he
Tuesday, December 19, 2000 7:56 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: cvs commit: openssl/crypto/rsa rsa_eay.c
>
> Hi Bodo (and anyone else interested),
>
> Just a thought I was having about locking and things. Rather than us
> worrying so much about how to do p
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> bodo18-Dec-2000 17:36:11
>
> Modified:.Tag: OpenSSL_0_9_6-stable CHANGES
>crypto/rsa Tag: OpenSSL_0_9_6-stable rsa_eay.c
> Log:
> Obtain lock CRYPTO_LOCK_RSA before creating BN_MONT_CTX
> structures and
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 12:56:21PM -0800, Geoff Thorpe wrote:
[...]
> What if the code was structured as follows;
>
> if((rsa->_method_mod_n == NULL) && [etc])
> {
> BN_MONT_CTX *bn_mont_ctx;
> int bailout;
> if((bn_mont_ctx=BN_MONT_CTX_new()) == NULL)
>
Hi Bodo (and anyone else interested),
Just a thought I was having about locking and things. Rather than us
worrying so much about how to do per-object locking (as opposed to our
current per-class locking), I wonder if it's worth considering how to
minimize the number and complexity of operations
11 matches
Mail list logo
