Some simplifications of vartime division (second attempt)#661
Merged
tarcieri merged 2 commits intoRustCrypto:masterfrom Aug 21, 2024
Merged
Some simplifications of vartime division (second attempt)#661tarcieri merged 2 commits intoRustCrypto:masterfrom
tarcieri merged 2 commits intoRustCrypto:masterfrom
Conversation
Merged
Member
tarcieri
approved these changes
Aug 21, 2024
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is a fix of reverted #646
div3by2()saturating_subwithwrapping_subin several places. While logically it is the same thing (the wrapping/saturation only happens for values that are later selected out), I think there are readability advantages. First, elsewhere in the code we use wrapping ops for selected out values (meaning "perform the subtraction without any checks, since we already have a constant-time condition for that"), sosaturating_subindicates that the algorithm actually uses the saturation mechanic. Second, in case of a bug, it will be easier to spot the consequences of a "0xffff..." value than a 0.Update:
div2by1instead ofdiv3by2with zero lower limbs. That's why I was wondering ifdiv3by2should be moved out ofdiv_limb.rs— when it's there it's perceived as a general-purpose method analogous todiv2by1, but it's not - it may return the quotient or the quotient plus 1. It is only supposed to be used in a specific place in the division algorithm. It returns aWideWordas a remainder, which was truncated toWordby the caller without any checks or explanations why it's supposed to be correct.