Re: Move OpenSSL random under USE_OPENSSL_RANDOM
От | Michael Paquier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Move OpenSSL random under USE_OPENSSL_RANDOM |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20201105121253.GA17513@paquier.xyz обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Move OpenSSL random under USE_OPENSSL_RANDOM (Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>) |
Ответы |
Re: Move OpenSSL random under USE_OPENSSL_RANDOM
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 10:49:45AM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > This must check for USE_OPENSSL as well as per my original patch, since we'd > otherwise fail to perform post-fork initialization in case one use OpenSSL with > anothe PRNG for pg_strong_random. That might be theoretical at this point, but > if we ever support that and miss updating this it would be problematic. That's actually the same point I tried to make at the end of my last email, but worded differently, isn't it? In short we have USE_OPENSSL, but !USE_OPENSSL_RANDOM and we still need an initialization. We could just do something like the following: #ifdef USE_OPENSSL RAND_poll(); #endif #if defined(USE_OPENSSL_RANDOM) /* OpenSSL is done above, because blah.. */ #elif etc.. [...] #error missing an init, pal. #endif Or do you jave something else in mind? > +#if defined(USE_OPENSSL_RANDOM) > > I'm not sure this comment adds any value, we currently have two non-TLS library > PRNGs in pg_strong_random, so even if we add NSS it will at best be 50%: I don't mind removing this part, the compilation hint may be enough, indeed. -- Michael
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: