Simon Josefsson <si...@josefsson.org> writes: >> +void >> +salsa20_core (uint8_t *dst, >> + const uint8_t *src, >> + unsigned rounds) > > is not ideal -- the reason is that the Salsa20 core is not defined with > a parametrised number of rounds, so the interface is somewhat of a > bastardisation.
Naming is difficult, it's awkward to use the prefix "salsa20" for a function which is "salsa20, but not really 20"... In sed syntax it would be salsa20_sx20xrx ;-) > In my work space, I have used the namespace 'salsa20r_core' instead. > This opens up for later addition of a true 'salsa20_core' function which > would use the official 20 rounds. > > What do you think? I have no better suggestions for naming. But if we think of salsa20r_core as mostly for internal use, maybe we don't need it? If I understood you correctly, your primary use case is scrypt, which you intend to implement in Nettle? Then maybe you would be better off without an extra wrapper function around _salsa20_core? If nothing else, you could then make sure you have proper alignment so you don't need an extra memcpy. I hesitate a bit to add, document and support a new "obscure" function until there's a clear external use case. Regards, /Niels -- Niels Möller. PGP-encrypted email is preferred. Keyid C0B98E26. Internet email is subject to wholesale government surveillance. _______________________________________________ nettle-bugs mailing list nettle-bugs@lists.lysator.liu.se http://lists.lysator.liu.se/mailman/listinfo/nettle-bugs
