On 12 September 2018 at 20:16, Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Eric, > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 12:08 AM Eric Biggers <ebiggers@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> I'd strongly prefer the assembly to be readable too. Jason, I'm not sure if >> you've actually read through the asm from the OpenSSL implementations, but the >> generated .S files actually do lose a lot of semantic information that was in >> the original .pl scripts. > > The thing to keep in mind is that the .S was not directly and blindly > generated from the .pl. We started with the output of the .pl, and > then, particularly in the case of x86_64, worked with it a lot, and > now it's something a bit different. We've definitely spent a lot of > time reading that assembly. > Can we please have those changes as a separate patch? Preferably to the .pl file rather than the .S file, so we can easily distinguish the code from upstream from the code that you modified. > I'll see if I can improve the readability with some register name > remapping on ARM. No guarantees, but I'll play a bit and see if I can > make it a bit better. > > Jason
