[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20251203190652.144076-1-ebiggers@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2025 11:06:52 -0800
From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
To: linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
"Jason A . Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
Thorsten Blum <thorsten.blum@...ux.dev>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <nick.desaulniers+lkml@...il.com>,
Bill Wendling <morbo@...gle.com>,
Justin Stitt <justinstitt@...gle.com>,
David Laight <david.laight@...box.com>,
David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>,
llvm@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH] lib/crypto: blake2b: Roll up BLAKE2b round loop on 32-bit
BLAKE2b has a state of 16 64-bit words. Add the message data in and
there are 32 64-bit words. With the current code where all the rounds
are unrolled to enable constant-folding of the blake2b_sigma values,
this results in a very large code size on 32-bit kernels, including a
recurring issue where gcc uses a large amount of stack.
There's just not much benefit to this unrolling when the code is already
so large. Let's roll up the rounds when !CONFIG_64BIT. Then, remove
the now-unnecessary override of the stack frame size warning.
Code size improvements for blake2b_compress_generic():
Size before (bytes) Size after (bytes)
------------------- ------------------
i386, gcc 27584 3632
i386, clang 18208 3248
arm32, gcc 19912 2860
arm32, clang 21336 3344
Running the BLAKE2b benchmark on a !CONFIG_64BIT kernel on an x86_64
processor shows a 16384B throughput change of 351 => 340 MB/s (gcc) or
442 MB/s => 375 MB/s (clang). So clearly not much of a slowdown either.
But also that microbenchmark also effectively disregards cache usage,
which is important in practice and is far better in the smaller code.
Note: If we rolled up the loop on x86_64 too, the change would be
7024 bytes => 1584 bytes and 1960 MB/s => 1396 MB/s (gcc), or
6848 bytes => 1696 bytes and 1920 MB/s => 1263 MB/s (clang).
Maybe still worth it, though not quite as clearly beneficial.
Fixes: 91d689337fe8 ("crypto: blake2b - add blake2b generic implementation")
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
---
lib/crypto/Makefile | 1 -
lib/crypto/blake2b.c | 25 +++++++++++++------------
2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/crypto/Makefile b/lib/crypto/Makefile
index b5346cebbb55..330ab65b29c4 100644
--- a/lib/crypto/Makefile
+++ b/lib/crypto/Makefile
@@ -31,11 +31,10 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_CRYPTO_LIB_GF128MUL) += gf128mul.o
################################################################################
obj-$(CONFIG_CRYPTO_LIB_BLAKE2B) += libblake2b.o
libblake2b-y := blake2b.o
-CFLAGS_blake2b.o := -Wframe-larger-than=4096 # https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105930
ifeq ($(CONFIG_CRYPTO_LIB_BLAKE2B_ARCH),y)
CFLAGS_blake2b.o += -I$(src)/$(SRCARCH)
libblake2b-$(CONFIG_ARM) += arm/blake2b-neon-core.o
endif # CONFIG_CRYPTO_LIB_BLAKE2B_ARCH
diff --git a/lib/crypto/blake2b.c b/lib/crypto/blake2b.c
index 09c6d65d8a6e..923cda5c7603 100644
--- a/lib/crypto/blake2b.c
+++ b/lib/crypto/blake2b.c
@@ -12,10 +12,11 @@
#include <linux/bug.h>
#include <linux/export.h>
#include <linux/kernel.h>
#include <linux/module.h>
#include <linux/string.h>
+#include <linux/unroll.h>
#include <linux/types.h>
static const u8 blake2b_sigma[12][16] = {
{ 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 },
{ 14, 10, 4, 8, 9, 15, 13, 6, 1, 12, 0, 2, 11, 7, 5, 3 },
@@ -81,22 +82,22 @@ blake2b_compress_generic(struct blake2b_ctx *ctx,
G(r, 4, v[0], v[ 5], v[10], v[15]); \
G(r, 5, v[1], v[ 6], v[11], v[12]); \
G(r, 6, v[2], v[ 7], v[ 8], v[13]); \
G(r, 7, v[3], v[ 4], v[ 9], v[14]); \
} while (0)
- ROUND(0);
- ROUND(1);
- ROUND(2);
- ROUND(3);
- ROUND(4);
- ROUND(5);
- ROUND(6);
- ROUND(7);
- ROUND(8);
- ROUND(9);
- ROUND(10);
- ROUND(11);
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_64BIT
+ /*
+ * Unroll the rounds loop to enable constant-folding of the
+ * blake2b_sigma values. Seems worthwhile on 64-bit kernels.
+ * Not worthwhile on 32-bit kernels because the code size is
+ * already so large there due to BLAKE2b using 64-bit words.
+ */
+ unrolled_full
+#endif
+ for (int r = 0; r < 12; r++)
+ ROUND(r);
#undef G
#undef ROUND
for (i = 0; i < 8; ++i)
base-commit: 3f9f0252130e7dd60d41be0802bf58f6471c691d
--
2.52.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists