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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Backport 2.28: Fix usage & error reporting in SSL programs #8118

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Oct 25, 2023
Merged

Backport 2.28: Fix usage & error reporting in SSL programs #8118

merged 3 commits into from
Oct 25, 2023

Conversation

gilles-peskine-arm
Copy link
Contributor

Trivial backport of #7844

PR checklist

Please tick as appropriate and edit the reasons (e.g.: "backport: not needed because this is a new feature")

mpg added 3 commits August 23, 2023 20:32
@mpg @gilles-peskine-arm
SSL programs: group options processing in 1 place
779cceb 
Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <[email protected]>
@mpg @gilles-peskine-arm
SSL programs: allow invoking without arguments
797cfd8 
All options have reasonable default so the programs don't need arguments
to do something useful.

It is widely accepted for programs that can work without arguments need
not insist on the user passing arguments, see 'ls', 'wc', 'sort', 'more'
and any number of POSIX utilities that all work without arguments.

It is also the historical behaviour of those programs, and something
relied one by at least a few team members.

Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <[email protected]>
@mpg @gilles-peskine-arm
SSL programs: improve command-line error reporting
fc8ad27 
Every now and then, I see of these programs failing with a super-long
usage message that gives no clue as to what went wrong. (Recently it
happened with a test case in ssl-opt.sh with a fairly long command line
that was entirely correct, except some options were not valid in this
config - the test should have been skipped but wasn't due to some other
bug. It took me longer to figure out than it should have, and could have
if the program had simply reported which param was not recognized.)

Also, have an explicit "help" command, separate "help_ciphersuites", and
have default usage message that's not multiple screens long.

Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <[email protected]>
@gilles-peskine-arm gilles-peskine-arm added needs-review Every commit must be reviewed by at least two team members, component-tls needs-ci Needs to pass CI tests needs-reviewer This PR needs someone to pick it up for review size-s Estimated task size: small (~2d) priority-medium Medium priority - this can be reviewed as time permits labels Aug 23, 2023
@gilles-peskine-arm gilles-peskine-arm removed the needs-ci Needs to pass CI tests label Oct 9, 2023
mpg
mpg approved these changes Oct 24, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@mpg mpg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Approving as a faithful backport of #7844

@mpg
Copy link
Contributor

mpg commented Oct 24, 2023

@gowthamsk-arm Since you reviewed the original PR (thanks!), would you review this (trivial) backport as well?

gowthamsk-arm
gowthamsk-arm approved these changes Oct 25, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@gowthamsk-arm gowthamsk-arm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM.

@gilles-peskine-arm gilles-peskine-arm added approved Design and code approved - may be waiting for CI or backports and removed needs-review Every commit must be reviewed by at least two team members, needs-reviewer This PR needs someone to pick it up for review labels Oct 25, 2023
@gilles-peskine-arm gilles-peskine-arm mentioned this pull request Oct 25, 2023
Merged
3 tasks
@gilles-peskine-arm gilles-peskine-arm added this pull request to the merge queue Oct 25, 2023
@github-merge-queue github-merge-queue bot removed this pull request from the merge queue due to failed status checks Oct 25, 2023
@gilles-peskine-arm
Copy link
Contributor Author

Something went wrong in the merge queue. The first error is apparently

Failed job: all_u16-test_small_ssl_dtls_max_buffering
Caught: java.lang.IllegalStateException: running computer lacks a node
	at org.jenkinsci.plugins.workflow.support.steps.ExecutorStepExecution$PlaceholderTask$PlaceholderExecutable.run(ExecutorStepExecution.java:651)
	at hudson.model.ResourceController.execute(ResourceController.java:97)
	at hudson.model.Executor.run(Executor.java:429)

Though this looks like it might be a consequence of aborting due to some other error. But if so I don't know what the error was.

I'll retry the merge queue.

@gilles-peskine-arm gilles-peskine-arm added this pull request to the merge queue Oct 25, 2023
Merged via the queue into Mbed-TLS:mbedtls-2.28 with commit f38e2fe Oct 25, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@gowthamsk-arm gowthamsk-arm gowthamsk-arm approved these changes

@mpg mpg mpg approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
approved Design and code approved - may be waiting for CI or backports component-tls priority-medium Medium priority - this can be reviewed as time permits size-s Estimated task size: small (~2d)
Projects
Non-roadmap pull requests
Archived in project
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@gilles-peskine-arm @mpg @gowthamsk-arm