| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Also, document the features.
Closes #588.
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
The config parsing wants this. Also there are some anomalies in the
types here that ought to be tidied up.
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
This clarifies that the types apply to pluggable transports only,
and not (typically) to the default plain-old-TCP transport.
|
| |
|
|
| |
We'll need to sort these out as we implement pluggable transports.
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
I've tried to name and structure these for consistency, and
comment reasonably well. We'll still probably want to make changes.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
As with `TransportId`, this type only gets complicated when
`pt-client` is enabled: it's meant to stay simple for relays and
non-PT-using clients.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
With this change, each individual identity type becomes optional.
The functions that expose them unconditionally are now in a "legacy"
trait that only some downstream types are expected to implement.
There are new convenience APIs in HasRelayIds:
* to return Option<&keytype>,
* to see if one identity-set contains another.
This commit will break several downstream crates! For the
reviewer's convenience, I will put the fixes for those crates into a
series of squash! commits on this one.
tor-netdir
----------
Revise tor-netdir to accept optional identities. This required some
caveats and workarounds about the cases where we have to deal with a
key type that the tor-netdir code does not currently recognize at
all. If we start to add more identity types in the future, we may
well want more internal indices in this code.
tor-proto
---------
In order to make tor-proto support optional identities, there were
fewer changes than I thought. Some "check" functions needed to start
looking at "all the ids we want" rather than at "the two known IDs";
they also needed to accommodate that case where we don't have an ID
that we demand.
This change will also help with bridges, since we want to be able to
connect to a bridge without knowing all of its IDs up front.
The protocol currently _requires_ the two current ID types in some
places. To deal with that, I added a new `MissingId` error.
I also removed a couple of unconditional identity accessors for
chanmgr; code should use `target().identity(...)` instead.
tor-chanmgr
-----------
This is an incomplete conversion: it does not at all handle channel
targets without Ed25519 identities yet. It still uses those
identities to index its internal map from identity to channel; but
it gives a new `MissingId` error type if it's given a channel target
that doesn't have one.
We'll want to revise the map type again down the road when we
implement bridges, but I'd rather not step on the channel-padding
work in progress right now.
tor-guardmgr
------------
This change is mostly a matter of constructing owned identity types
more sensibly, rather than unwrapping them directly.
There are some places marked with TODOs where we still depend on
particular identity types, because of how the directory protocol
works. This will need revisiting when we add bridge support here.
tor-circmgr
-----------
These changes are just relatively simple API changes in the tests.
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
This makes lookups a little more efficient. I do with that HashSet
just supported this use-case, but for now this seems our best option.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The formats used here are backward-compatible with those used by C
tor and those used elsewhere in our code. We need a way to encode
_both_ current kinds of identities as a string that tells you what
kind of ID they are. Traditionally we have used hexadecimal,
sometimes with a $, for RSA ids, and we have used base64 for Ed25519
IDs.
We also introduce a new forward-compatible format for new identity
keys in the future. (The new format is the key identity type, a
colon, and the id encoded as base64.) We will use this new format
_only_ when we need to encode identities in a way where it would be
otherwise unclear what kind of key we are dealing with.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
I wonder if these types are correct. I think it makes sense to have
a Ref type like this, rather than just using `&RelayId`, but it
doesn't seems that I can make `RelayId` and `RelayIdRef` implement
Borrow and ToOwned for one another, so maybe I've messed up.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We want the set of identities supported by a relay to be extensible
in the future with minimal fuss; we'd also like to make working
with these ID sets more convenient. To handle that, this commit
adds a new trait for "Something that has the same IDs as a relay"
and a new object for "an owned representation of a relay's IDs."
This commit introduces a similar trait for "Something with a list of
SocketAddr, like a relay has." There's no owned equivelent for
that, since Vec<SocketAddr> is already a thing.
Closes #428.
|
| |
|
|
| |
Update all lint blocks
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
From running add_warning, with manual picking of the right
hunks/lines.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
This was the result of:
maint/add_warning crates/*/src/{lib,main}.rs
and then manually curating the results.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This lint is IMO inherently ill-conceived.
I have looked for the reasons why this might be thought to be a good
idea and there were basically two (and they are sort of contradictory):
I. "Calling ‘.clone()` on an Rc, Arc, or Weak can obscure the fact
that only the pointer is being cloned, not the underlying data."
This is the wording from
https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/v0.0.212/#clone_on_ref_ptr
It is a bit terse; we are left to infer why it is a bad idea to
obscure this fact. It seems to me that if it is bad to obscure some
fact, that must be because the fact is a hazard. But why would it be
a hazard to not copy the underlying data ?
In other languages, faliing to copy the underlying data is a serious
correctness hazard. There is a whose class of bugs where things were
not copied, and then mutated and/or reused in multiple places in ways
that were not what the programmer intended. In my experience, this is
a very common bug when writing Python and Javascript. I'm told it's
common in golang too.
But in Rust this bug is much much harder to write. The data inside an
Arc is immutable. To have this bug you'd have use interior mutability
- ie mess around with Mutex or RefCell. That provides a good barrier
to these kind of accidents.
II. "The reason for writing Rc::clone and Arc::clone [is] to make it
clear that only the pointer is being cloned, as opposed to the
underlying data. The former is always fast, while the latter can
be very expensive depending on what is being cloned."
This is the reasoning found here
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/2048
This is saying that *not* using Arc::clone is hazardous.
Specifically, that a deep clone is a performance hazard.
But for this argument, the lint is precisely backwards. It's linting
the "good" case and asking for it to be written in a more explicit
way; while the supposedly bad case can be written conveniently.
Also, many objects (in our codebase, and in all the libraries we use)
that are Clone are in fact simply handles. They contain Arc(s) (or
similar) and are cheap to clone. Indeed, that is the usual case.
It does not make sense to distinguish in the syntax we use to clone
such a handle, whether the handle is a transparent Arc, or an opaque
struct containing one or more other handles.
Forcing Arc::clone to be written as such makes for code churn when a
type is changed from Arc<Something> to Something: Clone, or vice
versa.
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
This exception is no longer necessary now that the underlying CI bug
is fixed.
|
| |
|
|
| |
Closes #338.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
|
|
This will cause some pain for now, but now is really the best time
to do this kind of thing.
|
