Skip to content
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

crypto/tls: 500% increase in allocations from (*tls.Conn).Read in go 1.17 [1.17 backport] #52790

gopherbot opened this issue May 9, 2022 · 3 comments


Copy link

@gopherbot gopherbot commented May 9, 2022

@dt requested issue #50657 to be considered for backport to the next 1.17 minor release.

I'm unclear as to whether or not the performance regression seen here qualifies for a backport under the backport policy's definition of a serious issue with no workaround:

A “serious” problem is one that prevents a program from working at all.

I'll go ahead and open backport issues to continue the discussion there I guess?

@gopherbot please consider this for backport to 1.17, as it is a regression compared to 1.16.

@gopherbot please consider this for backport to 1.18, as it is a regression compared to 1.16.

@gopherbot gopherbot added the CherryPickCandidate label May 9, 2022
@gopherbot gopherbot added this to the Go1.17.10 milestone May 9, 2022
@heschi heschi removed this from the Go1.17.10 milestone May 10, 2022
@heschi heschi added this to the Go1.17.11 milestone May 10, 2022
Copy link

@heschi heschi commented May 11, 2022

This is a significant performance regression with what looks like a small fix. Assuming the backport is similarly small, approved.

@heschi heschi added the CherryPickApproved label May 11, 2022
@gopherbot gopherbot removed the CherryPickCandidate label May 11, 2022
Copy link

@gopherbot gopherbot commented May 11, 2022

Change mentions this issue: crypto/tls: avoid extra allocations in steady-state Handshake calls

Copy link

@heschi heschi commented May 13, 2022

cc @golang/security to review the fix

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
None yet

No branches or pull requests

2 participants