On Mon, 18 May 2026 12:02:02 GMT, Andrew Dinn <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Yes. Fixed. > > n.b. I see now why you originally wrote `(a_3, a_4)`. My confusion arose > because at this point it was not clear tome that the `as` being input here > were actually the 4th and fifth limb of a sequence of 5 52-bit quantities > taken from input array `a`. > > I still think it is clearer to keep `a_0` and `a_1` here. The comments I > suggested you add to the calling routine make it clear that in the context of > that method the pair of 52-bit values in register `as` are the 4th and 5th > limbs `(a3, a4)`. Meanwhile in this routine where we accept two full `a` > values and four half `b` values it makes more sense to label the `as` as > `a_0` and `a_1`. You are right. I added some more comments to explain why it is a_3 and a_4. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/30941#discussion_r3288497591
