phc-discussions - Supporting AVX2/SSE2 or not with a single binary

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>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAOLP8p7gR_bZuXqDhgzz--F5VNmkwd+mRjJRKGuCag2C_C3wdA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 20:54:27 -0400
From: Bill Cox <waywardgeek@...il.com>
To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: Supporting AVX2/SSE2 or not with a single binary

One reason I think we see applications running without SSE/AVX2
support is that operating systems don't want to support two versions
of a binary, and they have to support older machines.  The Blake2 code
I've read does not provide for a single binary that supports both - I
have to link either to the blake2-ref code or the blake2-sse code.  My
TwoCats code has inherited this limitation, since I used the Blake2
code as a roadmap for figuring out how SSE2 works.  These guys over on
StackOverflow think they've got code to detect SIMD support and allow
a single binary to support both:

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6121792/how-to-check-if-a-cpu-supports-the-sse3-instruction-set

How cool is StackOverflow?  So, is this the right way to build
high-speed crypto binaries now days?

Bill