feat(wpa_supplicant): Add optimized PSK impl (IDFGH-14280)

[ivq]

Description

Add an optimized Wi-Fi PSK implementation.
Resolves #15072 .

ESP32 is not supported as it makes the impl complex a lot as the SHA-1 of ESP32 does not support interleaving operation. fastpbkdf2 has handled the oddness of it and I do not want to do it again.
Also, it is using typical SHA-1 mode rather than DMA mode as DMA mode would be far more complex: There are GDMA and non-GDMA DMA, and the DMA is a shared resource so proper locking is needed and so on. It would be hard not to adjust the hal architecture when using DMA mode. I just want it to be simple.

For benchmark result, see #15072.

Main issue of the impl is that it is not a generic PBKDF2 and depends on hal directly, I believe. However, this is a trade-off we have to pay for optimal efficiency.

Related

Testing

Test cases are to be added.

---

Checklist

Before submitting a Pull Request, please ensure the following:

• 🚨 This PR does not introduce breaking changes.
• All CI checks (GH Actions) pass.
• Documentation is updated as needed.
• Tests are updated or added as necessary.
• Code is well-commented, especially in complex areas.
• Git history is clean — commits are squashed to the minimum necessary.

[CLAassistant]

All committers have signed the CLA.

[github-actions]

	Messages
📖	🎉 Good Job! All checks are passing!

👋 Hello ivq, we appreciate your contribution to this project!

---

📘 Please review the project's Contributions Guide for key guidelines on code, documentation, testing, and more.

---

🖊️ Please also make sure you have read and signed the Contributor License Agreement for this project.

---

Click to see more instructions ...

This automated output is generated by the PR linter DangerJS, which checks if your Pull Request meets the project's requirements and helps you fix potential issues.

DangerJS is triggered with each push event to a Pull Request and modify the contents of this comment.

Please consider the following:
- Danger mainly focuses on the PR structure and formatting and can't understand the meaning behind your code or changes.
- Danger is not a substitute for human code reviews; it's still important to request a code review from your colleagues.
- To manually retry these Danger checks, please navigate to the Actions tab and re-run last Danger workflow.

Review and merge process you can expect ...

We do welcome contributions in the form of bug reports, feature requests and pull requests via this public GitHub repository.

This GitHub project is public mirror of our internal git repository

1. An internal issue has been created for the PR, we assign it to the relevant engineer.
2. They review the PR and either approve it or ask you for changes or clarifications.
3. Once the GitHub PR is approved, we synchronize it into our internal git repository.
4. In the internal git repository we do the final review, collect approvals from core owners and make sure all the automated tests are passing.
- At this point we may do some adjustments to the proposed change, or extend it by adding tests or documentation.
5. If the change is approved and passes the tests it is merged into the default branch.
5. On next sync from the internal git repository merged change will appear in this public GitHub repository.

Generated by 🚫 dangerJS against 82c04ea

[ivq]

Big stack usage(276 bytes). Maybe replace with malloc?

[kapilkedawat]

@ivq Thank you for the contribution, give me some time to go through this.