These static output buffers are a legacy from a time before processes
had threads. This change drops support and callers who were depending on
this (of which there are hopefully none) will crash.
Change-Id: I7b8eb3440def507f92543e55465f821dfa02c7da
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/14528
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
Most C standard library functions are undefined if passed NULL, even
when the corresponding length is zero. This gives them (and, in turn,
all functions which call them) surprising behavior on empty arrays.
Some compilers will miscompile code due to this rule. See also
https://www.imperialviolet.org/2016/06/26/nonnull.html
Add OPENSSL_memcpy, etc., wrappers which avoid this problem.
BUG=23
Change-Id: I95f42b23e92945af0e681264fffaf578e7f8465e
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/12928
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Macros need a healthy dose of parentheses to avoid expression-level
misparses. Most of this comes from the clang-tidy CL here:
https://android-review.googlesource.com/c/235696/
Also switch most of the macros to use do { ... } while (0) to avoid all
the excessive comma operators and statement-level misparses.
Change-Id: I4c2ee51e347d2aa8c74a2d82de63838b03bbb0f9
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/11660
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This reverts commits:
- 9158637142
- a90aa64302
- c0d8b83b44
It turns out code outside of BoringSSL also mismatches Init and Update/Final
functions. Since this is largely cosmetic, it's probably not worth the cost to
do this.
Change-Id: I14e7b299172939f69ced2114be45ccba1dbbb704
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/7793
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This is in preparation for taking md_len out of SHA256_CTX by allowing us to do
something similar to SHA512_CTX. md32_common.h now emits a static "finish"
function which Final composes with the extraction step.
Change-Id: I314fb31e2482af642fd280500cc0e4716aef1ac6
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/7721
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Nothing ever uses the return value. It'd be better off discarding it rather
than make callers stick (void) everywhere.
Change-Id: Ia28c970a1e5a27db441e4511249589d74408849b
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/6653
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
I would hope any sensible compiler would recognize the rotation. (If
not, we should at least pull this into crypto/internal.h.) Confirmed
that clang at least produces the exact same instructions for
sha256_block_data_order for release + NO_ASM. This is also mostly moot
as SHA-1 and SHA-256 both have assembly versions on x86 that sidestep
most of this.
For the digests, take it out of md32_common.h since it doesn't use the
macro. md32_common.h isn't sure whether it's a multiply-included header
or not. It should be, but it has an #include guard (doesn't quite do
what you'd want) and will get HOST_c2l, etc., confused if one tries to
include it twice.
Change-Id: I1632801de6473ffd2c6557f3412521ec5d6b305c
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/6650
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The documentation in md32_common.h is now (more) correct with respect
to the most important details of the layout of |HASH_CTX|. The
documentation explaining why sha512.c doesn't use md32_common.h is now
more accurate as well.
Before, the C implementations of HASH_BLOCK_DATA_ORDER took a pointer
to the |HASH_CTX| and the assembly language implementations took a
pointer to the hash state |h| member of |HASH_CTX|. (This worked
because |h| is always the first member of |HASH_CTX|.) Now, the C
implementations take a pointer directly to |h| too.
The definitions of |MD4_CTX|, |MD5_CTX|, and |SHA1_CTX| were changed to
be consistent with |SHA256_CTX| and |SHA512_CTX| in storing the hash
state in an array. This will break source compatibility with any
external code that accesses the hash state directly, but will not
affect binary compatibility.
The second parameter of |HASH_BLOCK_DATA_ORDER| is now of type
|const uint8_t *|; previously it was |void *| and all implementations
had a |uint8_t *data| variable to access it as an array of bytes.
This change paves the way for future refactorings such as automatically
generating the |*_Init| functions and/or sharing one I-U-F
implementation across all digest algorithms.
Change-Id: I6e9dd09ff057c67941021d324a4fa1d39f58b0db
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/6405
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The documentation in md32_common.h is now (more) correct with respect
to the most important details of the layout of |HASH_CTX|. The
documentation explaining why sha512.c doesn't use md32_common.h is now
more accurate as well.
Before, the C implementations of HASH_BLOCK_DATA_ORDER took a pointer
to the |HASH_CTX| and the assembly language implementations tool a
pointer to the hash state |h| member of |HASH_CTX|. (This worked
because |h| is always the first member of |HASH_CTX|.) Now, the C
implementations take a pointer directly to |h| too.
The definitions of |MD4_CTX|, |MD5_CTX|, and |SHA1_CTX| were changed to
be consistent with |SHA256_CTX| and |SHA512_CTX| in storing the hash
state in an array. This will break source compatibility with any
external code that accesses the hash state directly, but will not
affect binary compatibility.
The second parameter of |HASH_BLOCK_DATA_ORDER| is now of type
|const uint8_t *|; previously it was |void *| and all implementations
had a |uint8_t *data| variable to access it as an array of bytes.
This change paves the way for future refactorings such as automatically
generating the |*_Init| functions and/or sharing one I-U-F
implementation across all digest algorithms.
Change-Id: I30513bb40b5f1d2c8932551d54073c35484b3f8b
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/6401
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
These are not in upstream and were probably introduced on accident by stray vim
keystrokes.
Change-Id: I35f51f81fc37e75702e7d8ffc6f040ce71321b54
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5490
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Use sized integer types rather than unsigned char/int/long. The latter
two are especially a mess as they're both used in lieu of uint32_t.
Sometimes the code just blindly uses unsigned long and sometimes it uses
unsigned int when an LP64 architecture would notice.
Change-Id: I4c5c6aaf82cfe9fe523435588d286726a7c43056
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4952
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Adam Langley
David Benjamin
David Benjamin
Brian Smith
Adam Langley