On 04/12/2011 03:50 PM, Simon Josefsson wrote: >>> I'm surprised the gnulib memxor ends up being used by GnuTLS at all. >>> Nikos, shouldn't the Nettle implementation be used instead? Is this a >>> question of the GnuTLS (gnulib) memxor symbol replacing the memxor that >>> is shipped with Nettle? Maybe the solution is to fix the Nettle >>> namespace. >> GnuTLS uses gnulib memxor, because it might be compiled either with >> nettle or libgcrypt. > But the performance critical uses of memxor is only through Nettle, > isn't it? And by accident Nettle ends up using the gnulib memxor > instead of its own. That could be fixed by either changing Nettle's > namespace, or do an '#define memxor gl_memxor' inside GnuTLS.
I don't quite understand your point. Is it that gnulib doesn't need a fast version of memxor? I mentioned that example with the effect it had on gnutls once I replaced the memxor version in nettle with the optimized one. GnuTLS can indeed solve its requirements alternatively, but I suggested the fix we used in nettle, in case other projects might be interested (since memxor.c was in gnulib I thought this was the case). regards, Nikos
