> ... use up > every damn register and it's really tight there. Now what would it take > to PIC-ify the code? Most likely an extra register! The one you'll be > calculating offsets from. And the problem is that there is no register > to spare ... good news are that there is only one [DES] > module that needs work.
And even better news are that it appears to be possible to squeeze out a register at the cost of [presumably] slight performance degradation on Pentium II and earlier. So how does it sound? I mean that we omit cast assembler implementation in shared context and trade some DES performance on PII? > And it should be explicitely pointed out that the problem is so to say > generic, i.e. all Intel platforms [not only Solaris, but as well Linux, > *BSD, etc.] are affected. ^^^^ I wonder if anybody can compile this "extern int foo; int bar() {return foo;}" one-liner with gcc -fPIC -O -S a.c on *BSD and post the assembler output? A. ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]