-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
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
mbedtls: move to shared-module #8926
mbedtls: move to shared-module #8926
Conversation
this enables the implementation to be shared among ports.
the mbedtls version is a bit different so there are some new #ifdefs needed. Tested with the ssl test from adafruit#8910 on Adafruit MatrixPortal S3 (no pico w testing done)
apparently it causes at least some code growth, esp32_eye doesn't fit now. |
@jepler I also tested this with this in hopes it might randomly fix #8925, but getting a lot of
And it's not the same ones everytime |
thanks for testing! I'm not sure why timeouts would be any different; it's using the same mbedtls library on espressif as it was before, just without the intervening esp_tls layer. Let's not hurry to merge this. |
Upping the |
On the other side, on the other issue we were getting a |
good call. The old Espressif code sets a 120s socket timeout(!) during ssl connect, overriding the regular timeout:
the code I wrote/adapted for pico w does no such thing, and now that behavior has "bled over" into esp32-land. Same for the different SSL failure message, that's been the Pico W behavior and now it would replace the former Espressif behavior. |
I'm all for making things closer to the same And yes, grabbed my |
I see that That said I'm still a bit surprised; I would have said that this timeout is about the time until the low-level socket can be read/written, not the time before an SSL-encrypted byte can be read/written. why would a 1s timeout be problematic during the SSL handshake unless it really takes 1s before the server is sending back some bytes to us... |
.. pulling this back into "ready for review" since it seems the timeout issue may be explained. |
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yay for sharing code across ports! Thank you!
The CI ran suspiciously few boards though... |
All the other boards passed the first time. It just ran on the single failure from the last commit |
this enables the implementation to be shared among ports, and switches away from using espressif's tls wrapper layer.
code size seems about the same.
this probably fixes #8268 but I didn't test that.
I did test that client mode code worked (on pyportal esp32s3 using the script from #8910)