Closed
Bug 1286087
Opened 9 years ago
Closed 9 years ago
Adds NIST known answer tests
Categories
(NSS :: Libraries, defect, P2)
NSS
Libraries
Tracking
(Not tracked)
RESOLVED
FIXED
3.26
People
(Reporter: wladd, Assigned: wladd)
References
(Blocks 1 open bug)
Details
Attachments
(1 file, 3 obsolete files)
63.12 KB,
patch
|
franziskus
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
This adds known answer tests from NIST to ecperf.
Attachment #8769922 -
Flags: review?(franziskuskiefer)
Updated•9 years ago
|
Comment 1•9 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8769922 [details] [diff] [review]
Adds known answer tests
Review of attachment 8769922 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In general great to have those test cases. But I think this is the wrong file for them. This should be a performance test (even if we don't check the actual performance on CI here yet).
Please add a new test case (something like ectest) and move this code over to the new test. You can look at the patch I sent you yesterday to see how to do that.
::: cmd/ecperf/ecperf.c
@@ -292,4 @@
> return NULL;
> }
>
> - /* skip leading 00's unless the hex string is "00" */
do the other tests still run with this change?
@@ +577,5 @@
> + arena = PORT_NewArena(DER_DEFAULT_CHUNKSIZE);
> + if (!arena) {
> + return SECFailure;
> + }
> +
nit: whitespaces (more below)
::: cmd/ecperf/testvecs.h
@@ +1,1 @@
> +static KAT ecdh_testvecs[] = {
those numbers are pretty long. Can you break them to make it look a bit nicer and make them easier to read?
Attachment #8769922 -
Flags: review?(franziskuskiefer)
Updated•9 years ago
|
Summary: Adds NIST known answer tests to ecperf → Adds NIST known answer tests
Assignee | ||
Comment 2•9 years ago
|
||
Attachment #8769922 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•9 years ago
|
||
Comment 4•9 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8770247 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch which includes test integration, different command
Review of attachment 8770247 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
lgtm. Can you upload a new version with those nits fixed?
::: cmd/ectest/Makefile
@@ +1,2 @@
> +#! gmake
> +#
nit: ws
::: cmd/ectest/ectest.c
@@ +26,5 @@
> + * Initializes a SECItem from a hexadecimal string
> + *
> + */
> +static SECItem *
> +hexString2SECItem(PLArenaPool *arena, SECItem *item, const char *str)
we should really put this into util at some point...
@@ +144,5 @@
> + PORT_FreeArena(ecPriv->ecParams.arena, PR_FALSE);
> + return rv;
> +}
> +
> +/* Performs tests of elliptic curve cryptography over prime fields If
bit: ... fields. If ...
::: cmd/ectest/manifest.mn
@@ +12,5 @@
> +INCLUDES += -I$(CORE_DEPTH)/nss/lib/softoken
> +
> +# This next line is used by .mk files
> +# and gets translated into $LINCS in manifest.mnw
> +REQUIRES = dbm seccmd
do we really need those? at least dbm is something we probably don't need.
::: tests/ec/ectest.sh
@@ +42,5 @@
> +
> +ectest_init
> +ECTEST_OUT=`ectest`
> +ECTEST_OUT=`echo $ECTEST_OUT | grep -i "not okay"`
> +# TODO: expose individual tests and failures instead of overall
yeah, that would be great to identify failures. but I'd be ok with keeping it this way for now.
Attachment #8770247 -
Flags: review+
Comment 5•9 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8770247 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch which includes test integration, different command
Review of attachment 8770247 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
::: cmd/ectest/ectest.c
@@ +163,5 @@
> + while (ecdh_testvecs[numkats].curve != ECCurve_pastLastCurve) {
> + numkats++;
> + }
> + printf("1..%d\n", numkats);
> + for (int i = 0; ecdh_testvecs[i].curve != ECCurve_pastLastCurve; i++) {
oh, I missed this. This initialisation doesn't work everywhere.
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•9 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Updated•9 years ago
|
Attachment #8770247 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Assignee | ||
Updated•9 years ago
|
Attachment #8770697 -
Flags: review?(ttaubert)
Attachment #8770697 -
Flags: review?(franziskuskiefer)
Assignee | ||
Comment 7•9 years ago
|
||
Attachment #8770697 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #8770697 -
Flags: review?(ttaubert)
Attachment #8770697 -
Flags: review?(franziskuskiefer)
Attachment #8771026 -
Flags: review?(franziskuskiefer)
Updated•9 years ago
|
Attachment #8771026 -
Flags: review?(franziskuskiefer) → review+
Comment 8•9 years ago
|
||
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 9 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → 3.26
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•