On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 02:27:55PM +0900, Atsushi Nemoto wrote:
>
> It seems modern gcc (at least gcc 3.4 on i386 and mips) can allocate
> the buffer conditionally. It is better to optimize for newer gcc,
> isn't it?
Of course it does. I must've been confused.
Cheers,
--
Visit Openswan at htt
On Fri, 7 Apr 2006 09:24:54 +1000, Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Another thing, could you pleas change the stack allocation in final so
> that it does it like cbc_process_decrypt? The reason is that gcc is too
> stupid to not allocate that buffer unconditionally.
I can do it, but it will
On Thu, Apr 06, 2006 at 11:37:42AM +0900, Atsushi Nemoto wrote:
>
> We don't. I think update functions do not need an aligned buffer for
> data which is smaller then the alignment size.
You're right. If we do ever get any hardware that requires this we can
always change it later on.
Another th
