summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/crypto/whrlpool/wp_block.c
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'crypto/whrlpool/wp_block.c')
-rw-r--r--crypto/whrlpool/wp_block.c64
1 files changed, 34 insertions, 30 deletions
diff --git a/crypto/whrlpool/wp_block.c b/crypto/whrlpool/wp_block.c
index 920430bd6c4a..0cc92a3b0149 100644
--- a/crypto/whrlpool/wp_block.c
+++ b/crypto/whrlpool/wp_block.c
@@ -1,14 +1,15 @@
+/*
+ * Copyright 2005-2016 The OpenSSL Project Authors. All Rights Reserved.
+ *
+ * Licensed under the OpenSSL license (the "License"). You may not use
+ * this file except in compliance with the License. You can obtain a copy
+ * in the file LICENSE in the source distribution or at
+ * https://www.openssl.org/source/license.html
+ */
+
/**
* The Whirlpool hashing function.
*
- * <P>
- * <b>References</b>
- *
- * <P>
- * The Whirlpool algorithm was developed by
- * <a href="mailto:pbarreto@scopus.com.br">Paulo S. L. M. Barreto</a> and
- * <a href="mailto:vincent.rijmen@cryptomathic.com">Vincent Rijmen</a>.
- *
* See
* P.S.L.M. Barreto, V. Rijmen,
* ``The Whirlpool hashing function,''
@@ -50,9 +51,10 @@ typedef unsigned long long u64;
#define ROUNDS 10
#define STRICT_ALIGNMENT
-#if defined(__i386) || defined(__i386__) || \
- defined(__x86_64) || defined(__x86_64__) || \
- defined(_M_IX86) || defined(_M_AMD64) || defined(_M_X64)
+#if !defined(PEDANTIC) && (defined(__i386) || defined(__i386__) || \
+ defined(__x86_64) || defined(__x86_64__) || \
+ defined(_M_IX86) || defined(_M_AMD64) || \
+ defined(_M_X64))
/*
* Well, formally there're couple of other architectures, which permit
* unaligned loads, specifically those not crossing cache lines, IA-64 and
@@ -73,7 +75,7 @@ typedef unsigned long long u64;
# define OPENSSL_SMALL_FOOTPRINT
# endif
# define GO_FOR_MMX(ctx,inp,num) do { \
- extern unsigned int OPENSSL_ia32cap_P[]; \
+ extern unsigned long OPENSSL_ia32cap_P[]; \
void whirlpool_block_mmx(void *,const void *,size_t); \
if (!(OPENSSL_ia32cap_P[0] & (1<<23))) break; \
whirlpool_block_mmx(ctx->H.c,inp,num); return; \
@@ -82,17 +84,18 @@ typedef unsigned long long u64;
#endif
#undef ROTATE
-#if defined(_MSC_VER)
-# if defined(_WIN64) /* applies to both IA-64 and AMD64 */
-# pragma intrinsic(_rotl64)
-# define ROTATE(a,n) _rotl64((a),n)
-# endif
-#elif defined(__GNUC__) && __GNUC__>=2
-# if defined(__x86_64) || defined(__x86_64__)
-# if defined(L_ENDIAN)
-# define ROTATE(a,n) ({ u64 ret; asm ("rolq %1,%0" \
+#ifndef PEDANTIC
+# if defined(_MSC_VER)
+# if defined(_WIN64) /* applies to both IA-64 and AMD64 */
+# pragma intrinsic(_rotl64)
+# define ROTATE(a,n) _rotl64((a),n)
+# endif
+# elif defined(__GNUC__) && __GNUC__>=2
+# if defined(__x86_64) || defined(__x86_64__)
+# if defined(L_ENDIAN)
+# define ROTATE(a,n) ({ u64 ret; asm ("rolq %1,%0" \
: "=r"(ret) : "J"(n),"0"(a) : "cc"); ret; })
-# elif defined(B_ENDIAN)
+# elif defined(B_ENDIAN)
/*
* Most will argue that x86_64 is always little-endian. Well, yes, but
* then we have stratus.com who has modified gcc to "emulate"
@@ -100,16 +103,17 @@ typedef unsigned long long u64;
* won't do same for x86_64? Naturally no. And this line is waiting
* ready for that brave soul:-)
*/
-# define ROTATE(a,n) ({ u64 ret; asm ("rorq %1,%0" \
+# define ROTATE(a,n) ({ u64 ret; asm ("rorq %1,%0" \
: "=r"(ret) : "J"(n),"0"(a) : "cc"); ret; })
-# endif
-# elif defined(__ia64) || defined(__ia64__)
-# if defined(L_ENDIAN)
-# define ROTATE(a,n) ({ u64 ret; asm ("shrp %0=%1,%1,%2" \
+# endif
+# elif defined(__ia64) || defined(__ia64__)
+# if defined(L_ENDIAN)
+# define ROTATE(a,n) ({ u64 ret; asm ("shrp %0=%1,%1,%2" \
: "=r"(ret) : "r"(a),"M"(64-(n))); ret; })
-# elif defined(B_ENDIAN)
-# define ROTATE(a,n) ({ u64 ret; asm ("shrp %0=%1,%1,%2" \
+# elif defined(B_ENDIAN)
+# define ROTATE(a,n) ({ u64 ret; asm ("shrp %0=%1,%1,%2" \
: "=r"(ret) : "r"(a),"M"(n)); ret; })
+# endif
# endif
# endif
#endif
@@ -143,7 +147,7 @@ typedef unsigned long long u64;
* one quadword load. One can argue that that many single-byte loads
* is too excessive, as one could load a quadword and "milk" it for
* eight 8-bit values instead. Well, yes, but in order to do so *and*
- * avoid excessive loads you have to accomodate a handful of 64-bit
+ * avoid excessive loads you have to accommodate a handful of 64-bit
* values in the register bank and issue a bunch of shifts and mask.
* It's a tradeoff: loads vs. shift and mask in big register bank[!].
* On most CPUs eight single-byte loads are faster and I let other