Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update to BearSSL 0.6+ release, add AES_CCM modes #5164

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Sep 28, 2018

Conversation

earlephilhower
Copy link
Collaborator

Pull in latest BearSSL head (0.6 + minor additions) release and add AES_CCM
modes to the encryption options.

Pull in latest BearSSL head (0.6 + minor additions) release and add AES_CCM
modes to the encryption options.
@devyte
Copy link
Collaborator

devyte commented Sep 27, 2018

Are there flashsize or heap use implications here?

@earlephilhower
Copy link
Collaborator Author

earlephilhower commented Sep 27, 2018

There should be no real heap difference. There is going to be a slight code increase as these new codes will be included in the library.

If flash size becomes an issue I can move from -O2 to -Os. In fact, in another bug we may want to track the performance difference between the two builds. In any sane processor, -Os would run slower. In this CPU, though, running large straight-line code from ROM can be slower due to the poor SPI BW.

@d-a-v
Copy link
Collaborator

d-a-v commented Sep 27, 2018

I observed that -Os can run faster than -O2 with other CPUs too (the gameboy advance's one arm7tdmi I believe it was)

The EC mul20 and square20 code was identical in two different files,
but because these copies were static, we ended up with an extra 6k of
duplicated code. Updated BearSSL to make them shared, saving 6KB.
@earlephilhower
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Tests with the latest update show <2KB flash growth on the BearSSL_Validation example.

@earlephilhower earlephilhower merged commit 5137d4d into esp8266:master Sep 28, 2018
@earlephilhower earlephilhower deleted the bssl0.6updt branch September 30, 2018 17:41
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants