On Sun, 9 Nov 2025 23:08:25 GMT, Shawn M Emery <[email protected]> wrote:
>> What were those "redundant shifts"? >> What I am suggesting is: >> return (SBOX(word >>>24] << 24) | >> (SBOX[(word >> 16) & 0xFF] << 16) | >> (SBOX[(word >> 8) & 0xFF] << 8) | >> SBOX[word & 0xFF]; >> >> if you define SBOX as an int[256] array. > > Yes, this would definitely speed up key schedule generation, but at the cost > of additional memory; +768 bytes per instance, where the total AES cipher > would be 1,268 bytes more per instance than the original Cryptix > implementation. The int[256] SBOX solution would increase performance by 2.64% for the AESReinit benchmark. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/28188#discussion_r2508442533
