[openssl-dev] 32 bit compilation of armv8 assembly support(openssl-1.0.2a)

[gaurav maheshwari]

>
> > What if relocation's were not resolved correctly and

> run-time switch doesn't really work as intended.
> It's possible to confirm this indirectly by comparing results
> for 'apps/openssl speed sha' and 'env OPENSSL_armcap=0
> apps/openssl speed  sha'. Can you do that?

I have done the performance checking as you have pointed
out.There is a performance difference, So  run time
switch is working as expected.

On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 6:50 PM, Andy Polyakov <appro at openssl.org> wrote:

> > It is compiling successfully and all openssl test are passing for ILP32
> > abi.
>
> There are remaining questions.
>
> The fact that tests pass is definitely good sign, but there still is an
> open and burning question. What if relocations were not resolved
> correctly and run-time switch doesn't really work as intended. It's
> possible to confirm this indirectly by comparing results for
> 'apps/openssl speed sha' and 'env OPENSSL_armcap=0 apps/openssl speed
> sha'. Can you do that?
>
> Development branch has more ARMv8 code. Can you test that too?
>
> And last question is not really a question. All this ought to mean that
> you have put together all those not-yet-upstreamed bits together, i.e.
> glibc, multilib, kernel patches, huh? For public reference I want once
> again to point out that additional ABI for AArch64 is work in very
> progress, and so far the only way to compile 32-bit code and target
> ARMv8 was to adhere to usual 32-bit ARM support (which does utilize
> ARMv8 crypto extensions), and that is currently the supported way, for
> good or bad.
>
> _______________________________________________
> openssl-dev mailing list
> To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mta.openssl.org/pipermail/openssl-dev/attachments/20150706/7fbbc378/attachment.html>