+static void cswap(fe51 p, fe51 q, unsigned int bit) +{ + u64 t, i; + u64 c = 0 - (u64) bit; + + for (i = 0; i < 5; ++i) { + t = c & (p[i] ^ q[i]); + p[i] ^= t; + q[i] ^= t; + } +}The "c" in cswap stands for "constant-time," and the problem is that contemporary compilers have exhibited the ability to produce non-constant-time machine code as result of compilation of the above kind of technique. The outcome is platform-specific and ironically some of PPC code generators were observed to generate "most" non-constant-time code. "Most" in sense that execution time variations would be most easy to catch.
Just to substantiate the point, consider https://godbolt.org/z/faYnEcPT7, and note the conditional branch in the middle of the loop, which flies in the face of constant-time-ness. In case you object 'bit &= 1' on line 7 in the C code. Indeed, if you comment it out, the generated code will be fine. But the point is that the compiler is capable of and was in fact observed to figure out that the caller passes either one or zero and generate the machine code in the assembly window. In other words 'bit &= 1' is just a reflection of what the caller does.
... the permanent solution is to do it in assembly. I can put together something...
Though you should be able to do this just as well :-) So should I or would you?
Cheers.
