On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 02:43:31AM +0100, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 01:53:53AM +0100, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > > shouldn't fork or something, but that seems disappointing. Or more state > > could be allocated in the zeroing region, to hold a chacha state, so > > another 64 bytes, which would be sort of unfortunate. Or something else? > > I'd be interested to hear your impression of this quandary. > > Another 128 bytes, actually. And the current chacha in there isn't > cleaning up its stack as one might hope. So maybe the cleanest solution > would be to just bite the bullet and allocate another 128 bytes per > state and make a mini chacha that operates over that? (And I guess hope > it doesn't need to spill and such...) I've got it implemented without using any stack now. Wasn't so bad. So all of the additional concerns I added will be addressed in v+1. Jason
