Hi, > The suggested fix for #3759: [PATCH] crypto: use bigint in x86-64 perl > addresses some issues but not all issues with the generation of the asm from > the perl scripts. Using the provided patch, one still fails with: > > /usr/bin/perl asm/aes-x86_64.pl macosx > aes-x86_64.s > /opt/local/bin/gcc-apple-4.2 -I.. -I../.. -I../modes -I../asn1 -I../evp > -I../../include -fPIC -fno-common -DOPENSSL_PIC -DZLIB -DOPENSSL_THREADS > -D_REENTRANT -DDSO_DLFCN -DHAVE_DLFCN_H -arch x86_64 -O3 -DL_ENDIAN -Wall > -DOPENSSL_IA32_SSE2 -DOPENSSL_BN_ASM_MONT -DOPENSSL_BN_ASM_MONT5 > -DOPENSSL_BN_ASM_GF2m -DSHA1_ASM -DSHA256_ASM -DSHA512_ASM -DMD5_ASM > -DAES_ASM -DVPAES_ASM -DBSAES_ASM -DWHIRLPOOL_ASM -DGHASH_ASM > -DECP_NISTZ256_ASM -c -o aes-x86_64.o aes-x86_64.s > aes-x86_64.s:1383:missing or invalid immediate expression `' taken as 0 > aes-x86_64.s:1383:suffix or operands invalid for `mov' > aes-x86_64.s:1544:missing or invalid immediate expression `' taken as 0 > aes-x86_64.s:1544:suffix or operands invalid for `mov'
I can't reproduce the problem. And expected values in lines in question are not big at all. What is common there is that there is division that obviously mistreated on your system. Can you try/confirm if enclosing it to backticks does the trick? I mean question is what happens if you replace occurrences of 240/8 with `240/8`? _______________________________________________ openssl-dev mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
