сб, 6 июл. 2019 г. в 16:09, Willy Tarreau <w...@1wt.eu>: > hi Guys, > > On Fri, Jul 05, 2019 at 05:07:27PM +0200, Emmanuel Hocdet wrote: > > > > > Le 4 juil. 2019 à 18:55, ???? ??????? <chipits...@gmail.com> a écrit : > > > > > > can you provide some comment around code ? > > > > > > I think almost nobody can read such code > > > > > > ??, 4 ???. 2019 ?. ? 21:17, Emmanuel Hocdet <m...@gandi.net <mailto: > m...@gandi.net>>: > > > Hi, > > > > > > This thread reminds me that with BoringSSL empty (and abort) handshake > is not set. > > > After tests BoringSSL seems to have simpler case. > > > I sent a patch to fix that. > > > > > > For OpenSSL <= 1.0.2, revert is the thing to do. > > > For LibreSSL, include it with BoringSSL case could be ok (with my > patch). > > > With time (no HB and better error report in libSSL), it seems code > could simply look like: > > > if (!errno) > > > conn->err_code = CO_ER_SSL_EMPTY; > > > else > > > conn->err_code = CO_ER_SSL_ABORT; > > > > > > > Only CO_ER_SSL_EMPTY and CO_ER_SSL_ABORT can be set for conn->err_code > > (it's the case for BoringSSL) > > Thanks Manu. Ilya and Lukas, just let me know if you still have any > objection > against this patch being merged, or if I should wait for Lukas' one first > to > be tested. Anything's fine for me, I'm just waiting for instructions. >
Lukas gave very detailed description in mail. however, code is not documented. I'd like to have more comments around. Code itself is fine > > Willy >
