SSL_set_rbio() and SSL_set_wbio() are new functions in 1.1.0 and really
should be called SSL_set0_rbio() and SSL_set0_wbio(). The old
implementation was not consistent with what "set0" means though as there
were special cases around what happens if the rbio and wbio are the same.
We were only ever taking one reference on the BIO, and checking everywhere
whether the rbio and wbio are the same so as not to double free.
A better approach is to rename the functions to SSL_set0_rbio() and
SSL_set0_wbio(). If an existing BIO is present it is *always* freed
regardless of whether the rbio and wbio are the same or not. It is
therefore the callers responsibility to ensure that a reference is taken
for *each* usage, i.e. one for the rbio and one for the wbio.
The legacy function SSL_set_bio() takes both the rbio and wbio in one go
and sets them both. We can wrap up the old behaviour in the implementation
of that function, i.e. previously if the rbio and wbio are the same in the
call to this function then the caller only needed to ensure one reference
was passed. This behaviour is retained by internally upping the ref count.
This commit was inspired by BoringSSL commit f715c423224.
RT#4572
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
The functions that have been deprecated by the auto init changes are
now guarded with deprecation checks, so it's fairly easy to see if
they can be used.
In test/dtlsv1listentest, we simply remove all init and cleanup code,
as they are call automatically when needed.
Reviewed-by: Matt Caswell <matt@openssl.org>
Clang rightly does not like extern symbols that are not declared
in any header file, as typically these are not intended for global
visibility and are exposed in error. This was indeed the case with
various file-scope objects in dtlsv1listentest.c.
Reviewed-by: Richard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>
Adds a set of tests for the newly rewritten DTLSv1_listen function.
The test pokes various packets at the function and then checks
the return value and the data written out to ensure it is what we
would have expected.
Reviewed-by: Viktor Dukhovni <viktor@openssl.org>
