[openssl-users] Initialising OpenSSL more than once - how do we handle this?

Viktor Dukhovni openssl-users at dukhovni.org
Mon Jul 30 19:27:31 UTC 2018

> On Jul 30, 2018, at 3:00 PM, Marty G <martygalyean at gmail.com> wrote:
> Of course I applaud the team's memleak testing!  How could my post be interpreted otherwise?  I wasn't trying to single anyone out, just the general idea that any memory leak is of little concern when the implications of the leak aren't fully known if the cause of the leak isn't known, and if one knows the cause, why not deal with it as simple good practice?  

One time initialization that allocates an object for the lifetime
of the process has justifiably not been considered a "leak".
Refactoring code to enable exit-time deallocation of static allocated
objects is mostly fruitless work.

The only time such "leaks" come into play is process exit and library
unload.  My advice is to not unload the library and to accept the
fact that a small fixed amount of memory might not be deallocated
at exit.  Typically, even "valgrind" will not report "leaks" for
addresses that are still referenced, so the static allocations
are not a problem.

Spending valuable cycles to eliminate these is not the most productive
use of our time.


More information about the openssl-users mailing list