Open
Conversation
Collaborator
|
in term of runtime check I think it's good, but not adding back |
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
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Despite that the previous PR #39 fixes compilation without x86 SIMDs flags, there is the case when a user of cryptoxide compiles for x86 and tries to execute code with cryptoxide can get an error SIGILL, because the code branch below works only in compile time.
By this PR I suggest adding a runtime SIMD support check and making cryptoxide std friendly because the
is_x86_feature_detectedis only available in the std. But I left the possibility to build cryptoxide as no_std by disabling default features. I can make an update for README.MD with instructions on how it can be done. That no_std manner I got from https://github.com/marshallpierce/rust-base64 and https://github.com/iqlusioninc/crates/tree/main/bip32 repos.cryptoxide/src/hashing/blake2/mod.rs
Lines 113 to 120 in 9d22605