>
> There are several options which have varying impacts on what speed would
> actually be measuring, I'll outline them below:
> 1) I just remove X25519 support from OpenSSL speed. This is the easiest
> fix but means nobody can use speed to measure performance with the X25519
> curve anymore. This
Sorry, we didn't think to put this out earlier...
The OpenSSL dev team is having a face-to-face meeting this week in Berlin,
co-located with LinuxCon. If you're in the area, feel free to stop by. In
particular, on Tuesday from 16:50-17:40 - "Members of the openssl development
team will be
> Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 15:39:13 +
> From: "Linsell, StevenX via RT"
> Running against master branch (commit
> 39c136cc53d7b6fafdd1a0b52c035fd24358e01c - Updates CHANGES and NEWS
> for new release) we see a failure when running openssl speed with the ecdh
> parameter:
>
>
Hi -
I had a link failure due to an unresolved external "calloc" when
trying to build a WindowsCE application using OpenSSL 1.0.2j.
calloc appears in crypto\LPdir_win.c on line 98.
I think one is supposed to use LocalAlloc for WindowsCE instead of
malloc or calloc.
I didn't get a link error
> signal BUS (invalid address alignment) in _time at 0x7e5c1944
> 0x7e5c1944: _time+0x0014: stx %o0, [%i0]
> Current function is main (optimized)
> 776 time((void *)server_random);
We have a fix that will go in shortly.
--
openssl-dev mailing list
To