Add locking to atomic operations in rw/rcu tests #24001
Closed
Conversation
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
nhorman
requested review from
Sashan,
levitte,
kroeckx,
hlandau,
t8m and
mattcaswell
nhorman
added
branch: master
|
Can we add "Fixes #24000" in the commit line? |
mattcaswell
requested changes
Mar 29, 2024
mattcaswell
added
approval: review pending
I neglected to add locks to the calls to CRYPTO_atomic_add in these test, which on newer compilers is fine, as atomic operations are defined. However on older compilers the __ATOMIC_ACQ_REL definition is missing causing these function to be implemented using an rwlock, which when NULL causes the locks to fail. Fix this my creating the lock and using them appropriately
Add locking to atomic operations in rw/rcu tests I neglected to add locks to the calls to CRYPTO_atomic_add in these test, which on newer compilers is fine, as atomic operations are defined. However on older compilers the __ATOMIC_ACQ_REL definition is missing causing these function to be implemented using an rwlock, which when NULL causes the locks to fail. Fix this my creating the lock and using them appropriately Fixes openssl#24000
paulidale
approved these changes
Mar 30, 2024
paulidale
removed
the
approval: otc review pending
mattcaswell
approved these changes
Apr 1, 2024
mattcaswell
added
approval: done
openssl-machine
added
approval: ready to merge
|
This pull request is ready to merge |
|
merged |
openssl-machine
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 2, 2024
I neglected to add locks to the calls to CRYPTO_atomic_add in these test, which on newer compilers is fine, as atomic operations are defined. However on older compilers the __ATOMIC_ACQ_REL definition is missing causing these function to be implemented using an rwlock, which when NULL causes the locks to fail. Fix this my creating the lock and using them appropriately Fixes #24000 Reviewed-by: Matt Caswell <matt@openssl.org> Reviewed-by: Paul Dale <ppzgs1@gmail.com> (Merged from #24001)
|
Cherry picked to 3.3 branch as it was approved for it. |
openssl-machine
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 11, 2024
I neglected to add locks to the calls to CRYPTO_atomic_add in these test, which on newer compilers is fine, as atomic operations are defined. However on older compilers the __ATOMIC_ACQ_REL definition is missing causing these function to be implemented using an rwlock, which when NULL causes the locks to fail. Fix this my creating the lock and using them appropriately Fixes #24000 Reviewed-by: Matt Caswell <matt@openssl.org> Reviewed-by: Paul Dale <ppzgs1@gmail.com> (Merged from #24001) (cherry picked from commit 5f8b812)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
I neglected to add locks to the calls to CRYPTO_atomic_add in these test, which on newer compilers is fine, as atomic operations are defined. However on older compilers the __ATOMIC_ACQ_REL definition is missing causing these function to be implemented using an rwlock, which when NULL causes the locks to fail.
Fix this my creating the lock and using them appropriately