Christos Zoulas wrote:
> Please let the OpenSSL folks know.
Here it is:
https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/6828
The problem would be a screwed OpenSSL import on our own: the perl
scripts producing the asembly files were invoked in
src/crypto/external/bsd/openssl/lib/libcrypto/arch/i386/Mak
On 31.07.2018 10:28, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> In article <2c408f23-6eae-da00-dfb2-ebc7b66e6...@gmx.com>,
> Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>>
>> I'm for removal of gprof and deduplication of .a files in the base.
>>
>> While there, can we get rid of moncontrol(3), profil(2) and all the
>> corresponding c
On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 08:30:21AM +, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> Please let the OpenSSL folks know.
Now I thought a bit about it, I am now convinced the MMX optimizaton
for GCM should be enabled if CPU has MMX and SSE. Or it should be
modified to remove pinsrw, which requires SSE.
--
Emmanuel
In article <1nsrghw.14uf3th1ee92jam%m...@netbsd.org>,
Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
[... stuff deleted ...]
>
>But looking up pinsrw on a search engine, all pages I find suggest is
>should compe with SSE. Here is an example:
>http://www.felixcloutier.com/x86/PINSRW.html
>
>So is this a bug in OpenSSL? I
In article <2c408f23-6eae-da00-dfb2-ebc7b66e6...@gmx.com>,
Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>
>I'm for removal of gprof and deduplication of .a files in the base.
>
>While there, can we get rid of moncontrol(3), profil(2) and all the
>corresponding code?
I constantly see proposals to remove things from b
