-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29.6k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
src: improve SSL version extraction logic #23050
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -5725,6 +5725,21 @@ void Initialize(Local<Object> target, | |
#endif // OPENSSL_NO_SCRYPT | ||
} | ||
|
||
constexpr int search(const char* s, int n, int c) { | ||
return *s == c ? n : search(s + 1, n + 1, c); | ||
} | ||
|
||
std::string GetOpenSSLVersion() { | ||
// sample openssl version string format | ||
// for reference: "OpenSSL 1.1.0i 14 Aug 2018" | ||
char buf[128]; | ||
const int start = search(OPENSSL_VERSION_TEXT, 0, ' ') + 1; | ||
const int end = search(OPENSSL_VERSION_TEXT + start, start, ' ') + 1; | ||
const int len = end - start; | ||
snprintf(buf, len, "%.*s\n", len, &OPENSSL_VERSION_TEXT[start]); | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. The second arg should have been |
||
return std::string(buf); | ||
} | ||
|
||
} // namespace crypto | ||
} // namespace node | ||
|
||
|
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sorry, I posted a mildly incorrect version of
search()
(even though it looks like it worked out okay; amazing, computers usually aren't that forgiving.)It should look like this:
And the search for
end
should therefore be this:There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I guess you meant:
const int end = search(ssl, start, ' ') + 1;
instead of:
const int end = search(ssl, start, ' ') - 1;
?else I get truncated output: for example when expecting
1.1.0i-fips
I get1.1.0i-fi
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
How about this:
As K.I.S.S. as I could while it still compiles on GCC4.9
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
thanks @refack . I am seeing it as compiled into a regular function, with no static awareness of the
const string
orconst int
passed to it and leveraged by the compiler. Is it only my gcc? can you please check?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
in other words, where do we see the benefit of the
constexpr
optimizations that was the theme of this PR for sometime.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
more for the academics: https://godbolt.org/z/qWyDbk show it being compile time only (with
-O2
)