| commit | cdccbe121fa5dc8c6df7102eaedb62c99eec8273 | [log] [tgz] |
|---|---|---|
| author | David Benjamin <davidben@google.com> | Sat Nov 19 10:15:55 2022 -0500 |
| committer | Boringssl LUCI CQ <boringssl-scoped@luci-project-accounts.iam.gserviceaccount.com> | Thu Dec 08 21:30:05 2022 +0000 |
| tree | e2777fa96263e04540cd8a5a7336e7fe832fa0df | |
| parent | 7cb90e092f2eee7dde7fd73ea39fb491123554f6 [diff] |
Fully condition all assembly files. For the C files, rather than force the caller to juggle crypto_linux_sources, etc., we just wrap the whole file in ifdefs and ask the callers to link everything together. Assembly is typically built by a different tool, so we have less room here. However, there are really only two families of tools we care about: gas (which runs the C preprocessor) and nasm (which has its own preprocessor). Callers should be able to limit themselves to special-casing Windows x86(_64) for NASM and then pass all the remaining assembly files to their gas-like tool. File-wide ifdefs can take care of the rest. We're almost set up to allow this, except the files condition on architecture, but not OS. Add __ELF__, __APPLE__, and _WIN32 conditions as appropriate. One subtlety: the semantics of .note.GNU-stack are that *any* unmarked object file makes the stack executable. (In current GNU ld. lld doesn't have this issue, and GNU ld claims they'll remove it in a later release.) Empirically, this doesn't seem to apply to empty object files but, to be safe, we should ensure all object files have the marking. That leads to a second subtlety: on targets where @ is a comment, @progbits is spelled %progbits, per [0]. If we want all .S files to work in all targets, that includes these markers. Fortunately, %progbits appears to work universally (see [1], [2], [3], [4]), so I've just switched us to that spelling. I've also tightened up the __arm__ and __aarch64__ checks to __ARMEL__ and __AARCH64EL__. We don't support big-endian Arm (or any other platform) and, even if we did, the conditions in the assembly files should match the conditions in the C files that pull them in. This CL doesn't change our build to take advantage of this (though I'll give it a go later), just makes it possible for builds to do it. [0] https://sourceware.org/binutils/docs/as/Section.html [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-crypto/patch/20170119212805.18049-1-dvlasenk@redhat.com/#20050285 [2] https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92820#c11 [3] https://sourceware.org/legacy-ml/gdb-patches/2016-01/msg00319.html [4] https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/de990b270d73632a834cb37e6ea50db093321aad Bug: 542 Change-Id: I0a8ded24423087c0da13bd0335cbd757d4eee65a Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/55626 Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com> Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
BoringSSL is a fork of OpenSSL that is designed to meet Google's needs.
Although BoringSSL is an open source project, it is not intended for general use, as OpenSSL is. We don't recommend that third parties depend upon it. Doing so is likely to be frustrating because there are no guarantees of API or ABI stability.
Programs ship their own copies of BoringSSL when they use it and we update everything as needed when deciding to make API changes. This allows us to mostly avoid compromises in the name of compatibility. It works for us, but it may not work for you.
BoringSSL arose because Google used OpenSSL for many years in various ways and, over time, built up a large number of patches that were maintained while tracking upstream OpenSSL. As Google's product portfolio became more complex, more copies of OpenSSL sprung up and the effort involved in maintaining all these patches in multiple places was growing steadily.
Currently BoringSSL is the SSL library in Chrome/Chromium, Android (but it's not part of the NDK) and a number of other apps/programs.
Project links:
There are other files in this directory which might be helpful: