This was done just by grepping for 'size_t i;' and 'size_t j;'. I left
everything in crypto/x509 and friends alone.

There's some instances in gcm.c that are non-trivial and pulled into a
separate CL for ease of review.

Change-Id: I6515804e3097f7e90855f1e7610868ee87117223
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/10801
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>

We were sending decode_error, but the spec explicitly says (RFC 5246):

   unsupported_extension
      sent by clients that receive an extended server hello containing
      an extension that they did not put in the corresponding client
      hello.  This message is always fatal.

Also add a test for this when it's a known but unoffered extension. We
actually end up putting these in different codepaths now due to the
custom extensions stuff.

Thanks to Eric Rescorla for pointing this out.

Change-Id: If6c8033d4cfe69ef8af5678b873b25e0dbadfc4f
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/9061
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>

ssl.h should be first. Also two lines after includes and the rest of the
file.

Change-Id: Icb7586e00a3e64170082c96cf3f8bfbb2b7e1611
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5892
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>

Due to a typo, when a server sent an unknown extension, the extension
number would be taken from a NULL structure rather than from the
variable of the same name that's in the local scope.

BUG=517935

Change-Id: I29d5eb3c56cded40f6155a81556199f12439ae06
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5650
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>

This change mirrors upstream's custom extension API because we have some
internal users that depend on it.

Change-Id: I408e442de0a55df7b05c872c953ff048cd406513
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5471
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>