Including string.h in base.h causes any file that includes a BoringSSL
header to include string.h. Generally this wouldn't be a problem,
although string.h might slow down the compile if it wasn't otherwise
needed. However, it also causes problems for ipsec-tools in Android
because OpenSSL didn't have this behaviour.
This change removes string.h from base.h and, instead, adds it to each
.c file that requires it.
Change-Id: I5968e50b0e230fd3adf9b72dd2836e6f52d6fb37
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3200
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This is an initial cut at aarch64 support. I have only qemu to test it
however—hopefully hardware will be coming soon.
This also affects 32-bit ARM in that aarch64 chips can run 32-bit code
and we would like to be able to take advantage of the crypto operations
even in 32-bit mode. AES and GHASH should Just Work in this case: the
-armx.pl files can be built for either 32- or 64-bit mode based on the
flavour argument given to the Perl script.
SHA-1 and SHA-256 don't work like this however because they've never
support for multiple implementations, thus BoringSSL built for 32-bit
won't use the SHA instructions on an aarch64 chip.
No dedicated ChaCha20 or Poly1305 support yet.
Change-Id: Ib275bc4894a365c8ec7c42f4e91af6dba3bd686c
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/2801
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Chromium does not like static initializers, and the CPU logic uses one to
initialize CPU bits. However, the crypto library lacks an explicit
initialization function, which could complicate (no compile-time errors)
porting existing code which uses crypto/, but not ssl/.
Add an explicit CRYPTO_library_init function, but make it a no-op by default.
It only does anything (and is required) if building with
BORINGSSL_NO_STATIC_INITIALIZER.
Change-Id: I6933bdc3447fb382b1f87c788e5b8142d6f3fe39
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/1770
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Apart from the obvious little issues, this also works around a
(seeming) libtool/linker:
a.c defines a symbol:
int kFoo;
b.c uses it:
extern int kFoo;
int f() {
return kFoo;
}
compile them:
$ gcc -c a.c
$ gcc -c b.c
and create a dummy main in order to run it, main.c:
int f();
int main() {
return f();
}
this works as expected:
$ gcc main.c a.o b.o
but, if we make an archive:
$ ar q lib.a a.o b.o
and use that:
$ gcc main.c lib.a
Undefined symbols for architecture x86_64
"_kFoo", referenced from:
_f in lib.a(b.o)
(It doesn't matter what order the .o files are put into the .a)
Linux and Windows don't seem to have this problem.
nm on a.o shows that the symbol is of type "C", which is a "common symbol"[1].
Basically the linker will merge multiple common symbol definitions together.
If ones makes a.c read:
int kFoo = 0;
Then one gets a type "D" symbol - a "data section symbol" and everything works
just fine.
This might actually be a libtool bug instead of an ld bug: Looking at `xxd
lib.a | less`, the __.SYMDEF SORTED index at the beginning of the archive
doesn't contain an entry for kFoo unless initialised.
Change-Id: I4cdad9ba46e9919221c3cbd79637508959359427
Initial fork from f2d678e6e89b6508147086610e985d4e8416e867 (1.0.2 beta).
(This change contains substantial changes from the original and
effectively starts a new history.)
