On 04/07/2017 06:58 AM, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 06/04/17 21:39, Anthony Scarpino wrote:
I'd like to get a review for this performance change to use the existing
CounterMode parallelized intrinsic instead of GCTR's own version. The
two classes were nearly identical except for the doFinal() method which
doesn't belong in CounterMode.java.
I could have been more aggressive with this change, but I'm looking to
get this into 9, so I stayed away from completely merging GCTR into
CounterMode in case of incompatibilities. All tests security and
hotspot tests pass.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ascarpino/8177784/webrev/
This change looks good to me. Trivially, the class-level comment in
GCTR should be updated ( it refers to removed fields ). Also,
CounterMode.counter could be protected ( rather than package-private ).
-Chris.
Thanks Chris,
I left CounterMode.counter as package-private because the package is
what becomes the SunJCE provider. I don't believe there should be any
outside package classes accessing this code.
I updated the webrev at with the comment update:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ascarpino/8177784/webrev.01/
Tony
