On 16.12.2016 00:43, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > Hi Hannes, > > Good news. > > On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 10:45 PM, Hannes Frederic Sowa > <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> How's that sound? >> >> I am still very much concerned about the API. > > Thanks for pushing me and putting up with my daftness... the constant > folding works absolutely perfectly. I've run several tests. When gcc > knows that a struct is aligned (say, via __aligned(8)), then it erases > the branch and makes a direct jump to the aligned code. When it's > uncertain, it evaluates at runtime. So, now there is a single > siphash() function that chooses the best one automatically. Behind the > scene there's siphash_aligned and siphash_unaligned, but nobody needs > to call these directly. (Should I rename these to have a double > underscore prefix?) On platforms that have > CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS, of course all of this > disappears and everything goes directly to the aligned version. > > So, I think this assuages your concerns entirely. A single API entry > point that does the right thing. > > Whew! Good thinking, and thanks again for the suggestion. Awesome, thanks for trying this out. This basically resolves my concern API-wise so far. Hannes out. ;) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
