[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a2LAgEG7epWFtUZrcgk9OwpVJd+ji9Ru_rq4L-Qk_dYbg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 May 2020 23:31:07 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>
Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>,
Horia Geantă <horia.geanta@....com>,
Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...gle.com>,
"open list:HARDWARE RANDOM NUMBER GENERATOR CORE"
<linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] crypto: blake2b - Fix clang optimization for ARMv7-M
On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 7:12 AM Nathan Chancellor
<natechancellor@...il.com> wrote:
> > -
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_CC_IS_CLANG
>
> Given your comment in the bug:
>
> "The code is written to assume no loops are unrolled"
>
> Does it make sense to make this unconditional and take compiler
> heuristics out of it?
>
> > +#pragma nounroll /* https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45803 */
> > +#endif
> > for (i = 0; i < 8; ++i)
> > S->h[i] = S->h[i] ^ v[i] ^ v[i + 8];
No, that would not work, as gcc does not support this pragma.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists