From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Jun 11 16:21:20 2010
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03B171065679
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Fri, 11 Jun 2010 16:21:20 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from uqs@spoerlein.net)
Received: from acme.spoerlein.net (acme.spoerlein.net [IPv6:2001:470:9a47::1])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D64E8FC17
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Fri, 11 Jun 2010 16:21:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from acme.spoerlein.net (localhost.spoerlein.net [IPv6:::1])
	by acme.spoerlein.net (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o5BGLIK7036669
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO)
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Fri, 11 Jun 2010 18:21:18 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from uqs@spoerlein.net)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=spoerlein.net;
	s=dkim200908; t=1276273278;
	bh=w60hn2gFTZ91UNQ9TTJKQd6Hl021rLwAs/TJdU7EeZ4=;
	h=Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type;
	b=VghzMGdYayhz+SZsoyp3944rCN+kXW8Dfgd197bENCareiU4OvkdspQjvV4DPQfYw
	zzWpe1HwTbF1drgzLE/4TQ22B/BOSH32MWnbuVpxmGyja2PVRoo1S/Rg1VWj7DKpaH
	k4W8BeA1mPF8lAdeTDQS9EQOI9MtM8eL82Laluyo=
Received: (from uqs@localhost)
	by acme.spoerlein.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id o5BGLIbS036668
	for current@freebsd.org; Fri, 11 Jun 2010 18:21:18 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from uqs@spoerlein.net)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 18:21:18 +0200
From: Ulrich =?utf-8?B?U3DDtnJsZWlu?= <uqs@spoerlein.net>
To: current@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <20100611162118.GR39829@acme.spoerlein.net>
Mail-Followup-To: current@freebsd.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Cc: 
Subject: Cleanup for cryptographic algorithms vs. compiler optimizations
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 16:21:20 -0000

Hello,

optimizing compilers have a tendency to remove assignments that have no
side effects. The code in sys/crypto/sha2/sha2.c is doing a lot of
zeroing variables, which is however optimized away. I haven't looked
close enough to see if all these vars happen to fit into the registers,
but a nice overview can be had here:

https://www.spoerlein.net/scan-build/freebsd-head/sbin.gbde/2010-06-05-1/

Compiling the code with/without those assignment results in the same
object code. Is there a canonical way to zero those variables and should
we use them (memset perhaps? what are the performance implications?)

Regards,
Uli