We have a ton of per-file rotation functions, often with generic names
that do not tell you whether they are uint32_t vs uint64_t, or rotl vs
rotr.
Additionally, (x >> r) | (x << (32 - r)) is UB at r = 0.
(x >> r) | (x << ((-r) & 31)) works for 0 <= r < 32, which is what
cast.c does. GCC and Clang recognize this pattern as a rotate, but MSVC
doesn't. MSVC does, however, provide functions for this.
We usually rotate by a non-zero constant, which makes this moot, but
rotation comes up often enough that it's worth extracting out. Some
particular changes to call out:
- I've switched sha256.c from rotl to rotr. There was a comment
explaining why it differed from the specification. Now that we have
both functions, it's simpler to just match the specification.
- I've dropped all the inline assembly from sha512.c. Compilers should
be able to recognize rotations in 2021.
Change-Id: Ia1030e8bfe94dad92514ed1c28777447c48b82f9
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/49765
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
In configurations without threads, we're not thread-safe anyway. Instead
use the refcount_lock.c implementation which, in turn, calls into
thread_none.c, so this turns into a plain refcount.
This avoids a build issue on platforms which define NO_THREADS, use C11,
lack C11 atomics, and are missing a __STDC_NO_ATOMICS__ definition. The
platforms ought to define __STDC_NO_ATOMICS__ or implement them, but
atomics are also unnecessary overheard in NO_THREADS configurations
anyway.
Change-Id: I927e1825dd6474d95226b93dad704594f120450a
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/48565
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Also use a slightly more conservative pattern. Instead of aligning the
pointer as a uintptr_t and casting back, compute the offset and advance
in pointer space. C guarantees that casting from pointer to uintptr_t
and back gives the same pointer, but general integer-to-pointer
conversions are generally implementation-defined. GCC does define it in
the useful way, but this makes fewer dependencies.
Change-Id: I70c7af735e892fe7a8333b78b39d7b1f3f1cdbef
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/48405
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <alangley@gmail.com>
We have loads of variations of these. Align them in one set. This avoids
the HOST_* macros defined by md32_common.h, so it'll be a little easier
to make it a more conventional header.
Change-Id: Id47fe7b51a8f961bd87839f8146d8a5aa8027aa6
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/46425
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
It's now 2021. Hopefully we can at least assume anyone building with
-std=c11 also has a corresponding set of headers. Plus, even if you
don't, Clang seems to provide a header. (So C11 atomics work in
clang-cl.) Also apparently atomics are optional, so this checks
__STDC_NO_ATOMICS__.
This does *not* set C11 as the minimum version. If you build with
-std=c99, we'll silently use the non-atomics implementation. That's a
little magical, so I've kept OPENSSL_C11_ATOMIC as a way to assert that
you really want C11 atomics. Mostly it turns into a -std=c11 && !MSVC
self-assert.
Update-Note: If something fails to compile, we'll revert this and adjust
the check, or add an opt-out, or give up. Also, if building with
-std=c99, consider -std=c11.
Change-Id: I1a8074c367a765c5a0f087db8c250e050df2dde8
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/46344
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
In order to provide evidence to auditors that high-level functions end
up calling into the FIPS module, provide counters that allow for such
monitoring.
Change-Id: I55d45299f3050bf58077715ffa280210db156116
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/46124
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
David Benjamin
Adam Langley