On 03/14/2016 09:44 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 4:11 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> wrote:
>> Yes, with one small difference: I wouldn't be calling ERR_get_error()
>> in the common case where SSL_get_error() returns SSL_ERROR_NONE, on
>> the theory that skipping that case represents no risk. I'm making a
>> concession to Peter E's view that that will calling ERR_get_error()
>> more will add useless cycles.
>
> The attached patch is what I have in mind.
>
> I can produce a back-patchable variant of this if you and Peter E.
> think this approach is okay.
I think this patch is OK under the premises that we have established.
I wish we could avoid the huge, repeated comment blocks. Perhaps we
could put them at the top of the files once?
Also, why do you write 0UL instead of just 0?