linux-kernel - Fast Code and HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS (was: [PATCH] poly1305: generic C can be faster on chips with slow unaligned access)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 2 Nov 2016 17:35:21 -0400
From:   Jeffrey Walton <noloader@...il.com>
To:     "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
Cc:     linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Martin Willi <martin@...ongswan.org>
Subject: Fast Code and HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS (was: [PATCH] poly1305:
 generic C can be faster on chips with slow unaligned access)

On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 5:25 PM, Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@...c4.com> wrote:
> These architectures select HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS:
>
> s390 arm arm64 powerpc x86 x86_64
>
> So, these will use the original old code.
>
> The architectures that will thus use the new code are:
>
> alpha arc avr32 blackfin c6x cris frv h7300 hexagon ia64 m32r m68k
> metag microblaze mips mn10300 nios2 openrisc parisc score sh sparc
> tile um unicore32 xtensa

What I have found in practice from helping maintain a security library
and running benchmarks until my eyes bled....

UNALIGNED_ACCESS is a kiss of death. It effectively prohibits -O3 and
above due to undefined behavior in C and problems with GCC
vectorization. In the bigger picture, it simply slows things down.

Once we moved away from UNALIGNED_ACCESS and started testing at -O3
and -O5, the benchmarks enjoyed non-trivial speedups on top of any
speedups we were trying to achieve with hand tuned assembly language
routines. Effectively, the best speedup was the sum of C-code and ASM;
they were not disjoint as they appear.

The one wrinkle for UNALIGNED_ACCESS is Bernstein's compressed tables
(https://cr.yp.to/antiforgery/cachetiming-20050414.pdf).
UNALIGNED_ACCESS meets some security goals. The techniques from
Bernstein's paper apply equally well to AES, Camellia and other
table-driven implementations. Painting with a broad brush (and as far
as I know), the kernel is not observing the recommendations. My
apologies if I parsed things incorrectly.

Jeff