Pike-devel

pike-devel@lists.lysator.liu.se

2 participants
3046 discussions

SSL module
by Martin Nilsson (Opera Mini - AFK!) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 01 Oct '14

01 Oct '14

A little update on the SSL module. This is a test of running different cipher suites from OpenSSL/1.0.1f using different versions of SSL/TLS. In total there are 85 ciphers suites, of which only 16 totally fails, and they do that due to missing implementation of PSK and SRP key exchange, and SEED cipher. v3 1.0 1.1 1.2 [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : AES128-GCM-SHA256 [X] [X] [X] [X] : AES128-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : AES128-SHA256 [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : AES256-GCM-SHA384 [X] [X] [X] [X] : AES256-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : AES256-SHA256 [X] [X] [X] [X] : CAMELLIA128-SHA [X] [X] [X] [X] : CAMELLIA256-SHA [X] [X] [X] [ ] : DES-CBC-SHA [X] [X] [X] [X] : DES-CBC3-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : DHE-DSS-AES128-GCM-SHA256 [X] [X] [X] [X] : DHE-DSS-AES128-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : DHE-DSS-AES128-SHA256 [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : DHE-DSS-AES256-GCM-SHA384 [X] [X] [X] [X] : DHE-DSS-AES256-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : DHE-DSS-AES256-SHA256 [X] [X] [X] [X] : DHE-DSS-CAMELLIA128-SHA [X] [X] [X] [X] : DHE-DSS-CAMELLIA256-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] : DHE-DSS-SEED-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : DHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 [X] [X] [X] [X] : DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA256 [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 [X] [X] [X] [X] : DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA256 [X] [X] [X] [X] : DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA128-SHA [X] [X] [X] [X] : DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] : DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : ECDH-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 [ ] [X] [X] [X] : ECDH-ECDSA-AES128-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : ECDH-ECDSA-AES128-SHA256 [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : ECDH-ECDSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 [ ] [X] [X] [X] : ECDH-ECDSA-AES256-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : ECDH-ECDSA-AES256-SHA384 [ ] [X] [X] [X] : ECDH-ECDSA-DES-CBC3-SHA [ ] [X] [X] [X] : ECDH-ECDSA-RC4-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : ECDH-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : ECDH-RSA-AES128-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : ECDH-RSA-AES128-SHA256 [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : ECDH-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : ECDH-RSA-AES256-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : ECDH-RSA-AES256-SHA384 [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : ECDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : ECDH-RSA-RC4-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 [ ] [X] [X] [X] : ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-SHA256 [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : ECDHE-ECDSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 [ ] [X] [X] [X] : ECDHE-ECDSA-AES256-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : ECDHE-ECDSA-AES256-SHA384 [ ] [X] [X] [X] : ECDHE-ECDSA-DES-CBC3-SHA [ ] [X] [X] [X] : ECDHE-ECDSA-RC4-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 [ ] [X] [X] [X] : ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA256 [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 [ ] [X] [X] [X] : ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] : ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 [ ] [X] [X] [X] : ECDHE-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA [ ] [X] [X] [X] : ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA [X] [X] [X] [ ] : EDH-DSS-DES-CBC-SHA [X] [X] [X] [X] : EDH-DSS-DES-CBC3-SHA [X] [X] [X] [ ] : EDH-RSA-DES-CBC-SHA [X] [X] [X] [X] : EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA [X] [X] [ ] [ ] : EXP-DES-CBC-SHA [X] [X] [ ] [ ] : EXP-EDH-DSS-DES-CBC-SHA [X] [X] [ ] [ ] : EXP-EDH-RSA-DES-CBC-SHA [X] [X] [ ] [ ] : EXP-RC2-CBC-MD5 [X] [X] [ ] [ ] : EXP-RC4-MD5 [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] : PSK-3DES-EDE-CBC-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] : PSK-AES128-CBC-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] : PSK-AES256-CBC-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] : PSK-RC4-SHA [X] [X] [X] [X] : RC4-MD5 [X] [X] [X] [X] : RC4-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] : SEED-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] : SRP-3DES-EDE-CBC-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] : SRP-AES-128-CBC-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] : SRP-AES-256-CBC-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] : SRP-DSS-3DES-EDE-CBC-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] : SRP-DSS-AES-128-CBC-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] : SRP-DSS-AES-256-CBC-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] : SRP-RSA-3DES-EDE-CBC-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] : SRP-RSA-AES-128-CBC-SHA [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] : SRP-RSA-AES-256-CBC-SHA

1 0

Re: Array augmented assignment doesn't always work
by Chris Angelico 30 Sep '14

30 Sep '14

On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 2:05 AM, Henrik Grubbström (Lysator) @ Pike (-) developers forum <10353(a)lyskom.lysator.liu.se> wrote: > No problem, the test program triggered the bug consistently, so it was > easy to find and fix the bug. > > Fixed in current Pike 8.0. > Thanks for that! Confirmed successful. It actually took me a while to make that test program. The failing code was deep inside several levels of indirection, but when I tried to do the same thing manually, I invariably used a string literal instead of a string variable - and then it worked perfectly :) But I'm glad there are these occasional over-optimization bugs. They're part and parcel with a highly optimized interpreter, and that's something I love about Pike. ChrisA

1 0

Array augmented assignment doesn't always work
by Chris Angelico 30 Sep '14

30 Sep '14

Apologies for the non-minimality of the test-case, but this is a smidge weird. The changes made in b2d25e "Compiler: Improved soundness of the op-assign optimizer" seem to have broken this: //Should print ({ }) to stdout and return 0, because the array should end up empty. //This is what happens in 7.8 on Windows. //In the latest 8.0, the first removal fails, so it shows ({ "a" }) and returns 1. array(string) arr=({"a","b","c"}); int main() { add_constant("G",this); compile_string("void x() {string z=\"a\"; G->arr-=({z});}")()->x(); compile_string("void x() {string z=\"b\"; G->arr=G->arr-({z});}")()->x(); compile_string("void x() {G->arr-=({\"c\"});}")()->x(); write("%O\n",arr); return sizeof(arr); } In theory, the three forms of element removal ought to be equivalent, but the first one doesn't seem to be functional. I'm afraid the details are a bit beyond me - the optimizer isn't something I'm familiar with. All I know is, bisection points to that commit, and reverting it on top of 8.0 makes the above script work correctly. Sorry for the vagueness. ChrisA

2 1

Re: Program.all_inherits needs documentation... or a better spec
by Chris Angelico 28 Sep '14

28 Sep '14

On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 3:35 AM, Henrik Grubbström (Lysator) @ Pike (-) developers forum <10353(a)lyskom.lysator.liu.se> wrote: >>Program.all_inherits has a FIXME asking for docs. But its definition >>is a little odd: it returns a list of the given program's inherits, >>and everything they inherit - but not recursively. > > Not quite... Take a closer look at the loop -- It isn't a foreach()... > >>I could document it as such, but it strikes me that this should be >>recursive, similar to inherit_tree but returning a flat array. Example >>implementation in branch rosuav/pgm_all_inherits - what do you think? > > No need for a new implementation; the current already does it. Oohhhhh...... right. I looked at it and misread it as a manually-implemented foreach. Okay. In that case, I'll document it as-is, but also add an explanatory comment for the benefit of the next person. ChrisA

1 0

Program.all_inherits needs documentation... or a better spec
by Chris Angelico 28 Sep '14

28 Sep '14

Program.all_inherits has a FIXME asking for docs. But its definition is a little odd: it returns a list of the given program's inherits, and everything they inherit - but not recursively. I could document it as such, but it strikes me that this should be recursive, similar to inherit_tree but returning a flat array. Example implementation in branch rosuav/pgm_all_inherits - what do you think? ChrisA

2 1

Editing the Pike tutorial - where is it?
by Chris Angelico 21 Sep '14

21 Sep '14

The tutorial at http://pike.lysator.liu.se/docs/tutorial/ is a bit out of date, and its header comment says that it "will be updated ASAP". I'd like to fix some of it up (most notably the GTK bits; someone was asking me about them, as they're all GTK1 and don't work with GTK2), but can't find the source files in the main Pike tree. Poking around with the code librarian didn't show me anything, though I may have missed something. Where is the tutorial rendered from? ChrisA

2 2

Fun with lfuns: `= and `[..]=
by Stephen R. van den Berg 17 Sep '14

17 Sep '14

On the topic of lfuns: - Would an lfun of `[..]= be feasible and/or (un)desirable? - There obviously is no `= lfun. Is that technically challenging or hasn't there simply been no need to make it possible? I can imagine both operators to be useful in the context of String.Buffer: - `[..]= could replace a string in the middle of the buffer. - `= could be used as a shortcut to replace clear() and add(). -- Stephen.

6 13

testsuite
by Martin Nilsson (Opera Mini - AFK!) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 17 Sep '14

17 Sep '14

Recent changes to how the testsuite is run makes error messages from expected failures to be printed out. That is not helpful. Also, we've gone from 0 to 42 failing tests.

6 23

testsuite
by Per Hedbor () ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 17 Sep '14

17 Sep '14

Sorry, I had an error in my "it will now return" mapping. Actual example: > p->finish("<t a='b''c'\"d\"e>")->read(); ([ /* 3 elements */ "a": "b", "c": "c", "d": "d" "e": "e" ])

4 7

lfun `+= and bogus conditions, performance loss, semantic errors
by Stephen R. van den Berg 17 Sep '14

17 Sep '14

Object `+= lfuns are not called when they should have been. It appears that we don't call += lfuns directly, instead we expand a += b+c into a = a+b+c. Well, that is all fine and dandy, but, the f_add function then tries to fold this back into a += by checking if the number of refs on the object == 1, and then calling `+= instead. This check does not give any meaningful results given normal objects and += usage: - For one, the object might have an extra instance on the stack, in which case the minimum number of references becomes 2 already. - And for another, the object might have multiple instances which all refer to the same object; which *implies* that updating one of those using += should modify all of them. The following sample code: class refmeharder { int val; void create(int i) { werror("Set %d\n",val = i); }; void getval(string s) { werror("%s%d\n",s,val); }; void incval() { werror("Inc %d\n",++val); }; refmeharder `+=(int i) { werror("+= called %d\n", val+=i); return this; }; refmeharder `+(int i) { werror("+ called %d\n", val+i); return refmeharder(val+i); }; }; int main(int argc, array(string) argv) { refmeharder a=refmeharder(2); refmeharder b=refmeharder(3); refmeharder c=a,d=a,e=a,f=a,g=a,h=a; a->incval(); b->incval(); c->incval(); a+=5; b+=11; c+=23; a->getval("a"); b->getval("b"); c->getval("c"); return 0; } Together with the following debug-patch: diff --git a/src/operators.c b/src/operators.c index 45de79f..18fbe4a 100644 --- a/src/operators.c +++ b/src/operators.c @@ -1505,6 +1505,8 @@ PMOD_EXPORT void f_add(INT32 args) /* The first argument is an object. */ o = sp[-args].u.object; p = o->prog->inherits[SUBTYPEOF(sp[-args])].prog; +if((i = FIND_LFUN(p, LFUN_ADD_EQ)) != -1) +fprintf(stderr, "Object %p type %p refs %d\n", o, p, o->refs); if(o->refs==1 && (i = FIND_LFUN(p, LFUN_ADD_EQ)) != -1) { Results in an output of: Set 2000 Set 3000 Inc 2001 Inc 3001 Inc 2002 Object 0x200e750 type 0x2055450 refs 8 + called 2007 Set 2007 Object 0x200e7b0 type 0x2055450 refs 2 + called 3012 Set 3012 Object 0x200e750 type 0x2055450 refs 7 + called 2025 Set 2025 a2007 b3012 c2025 But should have resulted in an output of: Set 2000 Set 3000 Inc 2001 Inc 3001 Inc 2002 Object 0x200e750 type 0x2055450 refs 8 += called 2007 Object 0x200e7b0 type 0x2055450 refs 2 += called 3012 Object 0x200e750 type 0x2055450 refs 7 += called 2040 a2040 b3012 c2040 I'll be adding something to this effect to the testsuites. The immediate questions though here are: - The refs==1 check is way too limiting, the question is, is there a meaningful alternative? (Probably not). - The only way to solve this seems to be by supporting calling `+= lfuns directly. But, if we do, do we need to somehow suppress the autoconversion from a+=b+c to a=a+b+c ? Can it be suppressed for objects only? Where in the code is this conversion being done? -- Stephen.

10 51

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

Pike-devel