Replacing CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS on migration 101 to 110

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Replacing CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS on migration 101 to 110

Charles Mills

I am migrating a multi-threaded Windows application from OpenSSL 1.0.1h to 1.1.0f.

 

I am using the Shining Light pre-built Windows DLLs.

 

The code, which I wrote some time ago, has a statement HANDLE Comm::sslMutexArray[CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS];       

 

The array is referenced by my sslLockingFunction.

 

When I compile with the 1.1.0f headers I get at undefined symbol on CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS.

 

Is my understanding of http://www.manpagez.com/man/3/CRYPTO_num_locks/osx-10.3.php correct? Basically, I need to replace the static array sslMutexArray[CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS] with a malloc() or new to get an array of the size returned by a call to CRYPTO_num_locks(void)? Is that correct? Anything else I need to do in this regard?

 

Thanks,

 

Charles

 


--
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Replacing CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS on migration 101 to 110

Paul Dale

OpenSSL 1.1.x handle the locking themselves.  You don’t need to install the locking call backs and don’t need to provide locking functionality.

 

Pauli

--

Oracle

Dr Paul Dale | Cryptographer | Network Security & Encryption

Phone +61 7 3031 7217

Oracle Australia

 

From: Charles Mills [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Thursday, 19 October 2017 6:09 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [openssl-users] Replacing CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS on migration 101 to 110

 

I am migrating a multi-threaded Windows application from OpenSSL 1.0.1h to 1.1.0f.

 

I am using the Shining Light pre-built Windows DLLs.

 

The code, which I wrote some time ago, has a statement HANDLE Comm::sslMutexArray[CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS];       

 

The array is referenced by my sslLockingFunction.

 

When I compile with the 1.1.0f headers I get at undefined symbol on CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS.

 

Is my understanding of http://www.manpagez.com/man/3/CRYPTO_num_locks/osx-10.3.php correct? Basically, I need to replace the static array sslMutexArray[CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS] with a malloc() or new to get an array of the size returned by a call to CRYPTO_num_locks(void)? Is that correct? Anything else I need to do in this regard?

 

Thanks,

 

Charles

 


--
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Replacing CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS on migration 101 to 110

Charles Mills

Wow! Thanks.

 

You are saying to just drop out this array, and the two CRYPTO_set_..._callback() functions, and the functions they reference?

 

Charles

 

From: openssl-users [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Paul Dale
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 2:14 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [openssl-users] Replacing CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS on migration 101 to 110

 

OpenSSL 1.1.x handle the locking themselves.  You don’t need to install the locking call backs and don’t need to provide locking functionality.

 

Pauli

--

Oracle

Dr Paul Dale | Cryptographer | Network Security & Encryption

Phone +61 7 3031 7217

Oracle Australia

 

From: Charles Mills [[hidden email]]
Sent: Thursday, 19 October 2017 6:09 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [openssl-users] Replacing CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS on migration 101 to 110

 

I am migrating a multi-threaded Windows application from OpenSSL 1.0.1h to 1.1.0f.

 

I am using the Shining Light pre-built Windows DLLs.

 

The code, which I wrote some time ago, has a statement HANDLE Comm::sslMutexArray[CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS];       

 

The array is referenced by my sslLockingFunction.

 

When I compile with the 1.1.0f headers I get at undefined symbol on CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS.

 

Is my understanding of http://www.manpagez.com/man/3/CRYPTO_num_locks/osx-10.3.php correct? Basically, I need to replace the static array sslMutexArray[CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS] with a malloc() or new to get an array of the size returned by a call to CRYPTO_num_locks(void)? Is that correct? Anything else I need to do in this regard?

 

Thanks,

 

Charles

 


--
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Replacing CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS on migration 101 to 110

Paul Dale

Yes.

 

Pauli

--

Oracle

Dr Paul Dale | Cryptographer | Network Security & Encryption

Phone +61 7 3031 7217

Oracle Australia

 

From: Charles Mills [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Thursday, 19 October 2017 7:20 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [openssl-users] Replacing CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS on migration 101 to 110

 

Wow! Thanks.

 

You are saying to just drop out this array, and the two CRYPTO_set_..._callback() functions, and the functions they reference?

 

Charles

 

From: openssl-users [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Paul Dale
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 2:14 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [openssl-users] Replacing CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS on migration 101 to 110

 

OpenSSL 1.1.x handle the locking themselves.  You don’t need to install the locking call backs and don’t need to provide locking functionality.

 

Pauli

--

Oracle

Dr Paul Dale | Cryptographer | Network Security & Encryption

Phone +61 7 3031 7217

Oracle Australia

 

From: Charles Mills [[hidden email]]
Sent: Thursday, 19 October 2017 6:09 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [openssl-users] Replacing CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS on migration 101 to 110

 

I am migrating a multi-threaded Windows application from OpenSSL 1.0.1h to 1.1.0f.

 

I am using the Shining Light pre-built Windows DLLs.

 

The code, which I wrote some time ago, has a statement HANDLE Comm::sslMutexArray[CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS];       

 

The array is referenced by my sslLockingFunction.

 

When I compile with the 1.1.0f headers I get at undefined symbol on CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS.

 

Is my understanding of http://www.manpagez.com/man/3/CRYPTO_num_locks/osx-10.3.php correct? Basically, I need to replace the static array sslMutexArray[CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS] with a malloc() or new to get an array of the size returned by a call to CRYPTO_num_locks(void)? Is that correct? Anything else I need to do in this regard?

 

Thanks,

 

Charles

 


--
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Replacing CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS on migration 101 to 110

Charles Mills

Works like a champ! Threaded code is handling 800 TLS server sessions with nary a callback in sight.

 

Charles

 

From: openssl-users [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Paul Dale
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 5:04 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [openssl-users] Replacing CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS on migration 101 to 110

 

Yes.

 

Pauli

--

Oracle

Dr Paul Dale | Cryptographer | Network Security & Encryption

Phone +61 7 3031 7217

Oracle Australia

 

From: Charles Mills [[hidden email]]
Sent: Thursday, 19 October 2017 7:20 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [openssl-users] Replacing CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS on migration 101 to 110

 

Wow! Thanks.

 

You are saying to just drop out this array, and the two CRYPTO_set_..._callback() functions, and the functions they reference?

 

Charles

 

From: openssl-users [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Paul Dale
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 2:14 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [openssl-users] Replacing CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS on migration 101 to 110

 

OpenSSL 1.1.x handle the locking themselves.  You don’t need to install the locking call backs and don’t need to provide locking functionality.

 

Pauli

--

Oracle

Dr Paul Dale | Cryptographer | Network Security & Encryption

Phone +61 7 3031 7217

Oracle Australia

 

From: Charles Mills [[hidden email]]
Sent: Thursday, 19 October 2017 6:09 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [openssl-users] Replacing CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS on migration 101 to 110

 

I am migrating a multi-threaded Windows application from OpenSSL 1.0.1h to 1.1.0f.

 

I am using the Shining Light pre-built Windows DLLs.

 

The code, which I wrote some time ago, has a statement HANDLE Comm::sslMutexArray[CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS];       

 

The array is referenced by my sslLockingFunction.

 

When I compile with the 1.1.0f headers I get at undefined symbol on CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS.

 

Is my understanding of http://www.manpagez.com/man/3/CRYPTO_num_locks/osx-10.3.php correct? Basically, I need to replace the static array sslMutexArray[CRYPTO_NUM_LOCKS] with a malloc() or new to get an array of the size returned by a call to CRYPTO_num_locks(void)? Is that correct? Anything else I need to do in this regard?

 

Thanks,

 

Charles

 


--
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users