Convert field code to strict C89 (+ long long, +__int128)#193
Merged
sipa merged 2 commits intobitcoin-core:masterfrom Jan 24, 2015
gmaxwell:c89_field
Merged
Convert field code to strict C89 (+ long long, +__int128)#193sipa merged 2 commits intobitcoin-core:masterfrom gmaxwell:c89_field
sipa merged 2 commits intobitcoin-core:masterfrom
gmaxwell:c89_field
Conversation
This makes the software more portable to embedded systems and static analysis tools. Sadly, it can't result in identical binaries because C99 mixed declarations seem to make GCC emit superfluous stack-pointer updates. The compiler is also somewhat dependent on the declaration order.
Contributor
|
ACK |
Closed
real-or-random
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 19, 2026
8354618 cmake: Set `LABELS` property for tests (Hennadii Stepanov) 29f26ec cmake: Integrate DiscoverTests and normalize test names (Hennadii Stepanov) f95b263 cmake: Add DiscoverTests module (Hennadii Stepanov) 4ac6511 cmake, refactor: Deduplicate test-related code (Hennadii Stepanov) Pull request description: This PR implements the idea suggested in #1734 (review) and is based on the work from bitcoin/bitcoin#33483. Here is an example of the `ctest` output: ``` $ ctest --test-dir build -j $(nproc) Test project /home/hebasto/dev/secp256k1/secp256k1/build Start 1: secp256k1.noverify_tests.selftest_tests Start 2: secp256k1.noverify_tests.all_proper_context_tests Start 3: secp256k1.noverify_tests.all_static_context_tests Start 4: secp256k1.noverify_tests.deprecated_context_flags_test <snip> 193/196 Test #31: secp256k1.noverify_tests.ecmult_constants ......................... Passed 5.32 sec 194/196 Test #184: secp256k1.tests.ellswift_xdh_correctness_tests .................... Passed 5.62 sec 195/196 Test #191: secp256k1.exhaustive_tests ........................................ Passed 6.97 sec 196/196 Test #126: secp256k1.tests.ecmult_constants .................................. Passed 9.60 sec 100% tests passed, 0 tests failed out of 196 Label Time Summary: secp256k1_example = 0.02 sec*proc (5 tests) secp256k1_exhaustive = 6.97 sec*proc (1 test) secp256k1_noverify_tests = 23.77 sec*proc (95 tests) secp256k1_tests = 43.67 sec*proc (95 tests) Total Test time (real) = 10.21 sec ``` For comparison, here is the output for the master branch on the same machine: ``` $ ctest --test-dir build -j $(nproc) Test project /home/hebasto/dev/secp256k1/secp256k1/build Start 1: secp256k1_noverify_tests Start 2: secp256k1_tests Start 3: secp256k1_exhaustive_tests Start 4: secp256k1_ecdsa_example Start 5: secp256k1_ecdh_example Start 6: secp256k1_schnorr_example Start 7: secp256k1_ellswift_example Start 8: secp256k1_musig_example 1/8 Test #4: secp256k1_ecdsa_example .......... Passed 0.00 sec 2/8 Test #5: secp256k1_ecdh_example ........... Passed 0.00 sec 3/8 Test #6: secp256k1_schnorr_example ........ Passed 0.00 sec 4/8 Test #7: secp256k1_ellswift_example ....... Passed 0.00 sec 5/8 Test #8: secp256k1_musig_example .......... Passed 0.00 sec 6/8 Test #3: secp256k1_exhaustive_tests ....... Passed 6.26 sec 7/8 Test #1: secp256k1_noverify_tests ......... Passed 14.31 sec 8/8 Test #2: secp256k1_tests .................. Passed 31.65 sec 100% tests passed, 0 tests failed out of 8 Total Test time (real) = 31.65 sec ``` --- **New Feature:** As the number of tests has grown, the _labels_ have been introduced to simplify test management. Now, one can run: ``` $ ctest --test-dir build -j $(nproc) -L example Test project /home/hebasto/dev/secp256k1/secp256k1/build Start 192: secp256k1.example.ecdsa Start 193: secp256k1.example.ecdh Start 194: secp256k1.example.schnorr Start 195: secp256k1.example.ellswift Start 196: secp256k1.example.musig 1/5 Test #192: secp256k1.example.ecdsa .......... Passed 0.00 sec 2/5 Test #193: secp256k1.example.ecdh ........... Passed 0.00 sec 3/5 Test #194: secp256k1.example.schnorr ........ Passed 0.00 sec 4/5 Test #195: secp256k1.example.ellswift ....... Passed 0.00 sec 5/5 Test #196: secp256k1.example.musig .......... Passed 0.00 sec 100% tests passed, 0 tests failed out of 5 Label Time Summary: secp256k1_example = 0.01 sec*proc (5 tests) Total Test time (real) = 0.01 sec ``` or ``` $ ctest --test-dir build -j $(nproc) -LE tests Test project /home/hebasto/dev/secp256k1/secp256k1/build Start 192: secp256k1.example.ecdsa Start 193: secp256k1.example.ecdh Start 194: secp256k1.example.schnorr Start 195: secp256k1.example.ellswift Start 196: secp256k1.example.musig Start 191: secp256k1.exhaustive_tests 1/6 Test #192: secp256k1.example.ecdsa .......... Passed 0.00 sec 2/6 Test #193: secp256k1.example.ecdh ........... Passed 0.00 sec 3/6 Test #194: secp256k1.example.schnorr ........ Passed 0.00 sec 4/6 Test #195: secp256k1.example.ellswift ....... Passed 0.00 sec 5/6 Test #196: secp256k1.example.musig .......... Passed 0.00 sec 6/6 Test #191: secp256k1.exhaustive_tests ....... Passed 6.19 sec 100% tests passed, 0 tests failed out of 6 Label Time Summary: secp256k1_example = 0.01 sec*proc (5 tests) secp256k1_exhaustive = 6.19 sec*proc (1 test) Total Test time (real) = 6.20 sec ``` ACKs for top commit: purpleKarrot: ACK 8354618 furszy: Tested ACK 8354618 Tree-SHA512: 8c506ab08491aba4836b3058a8a09c929c6dd097c11e4e6f4deb20cf602285e73c3fd8a2c2040f7e92a058c7f8fc09752fa9de2ce80f7673adbdd505237ed262
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
3 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.
Convert field code to strict C89 (+ long long, +__int128)
This makes the software more portable to embedded systems
and static analysis tools.
Sadly, it can't result in identical binaries because C99 mixed
declarations seem to make GCC emit superfluous stack-pointer
updates. The compiler is also somewhat dependent on the
declaration order.
( Builds on pull req #192 )