.ident "ia64.S, Version 2.1"
.ident "IA-64 ISA artwork by Andy Polyakov <appro@fy.chalmers.se>"
+// Copyright 2001-2016 The OpenSSL Project Authors. All Rights Reserved.
+//
+// Licensed under the OpenSSL license (the "License"). You may not use
+// this file except in compliance with the License. You can obtain a copy
+// in the file LICENSE in the source distribution or at
+// https://www.openssl.org/source/license.html
+
//
// ====================================================================
// Written by Andy Polyakov <appro@fy.chalmers.se> for the OpenSSL
// ports is the same, i.e. 2, while I need 4. In other words, to this
// module Itanium2 remains effectively as "wide" as Itanium. Yet it's
// essentially different in respect to this module, and a re-tune was
-// required. Well, because some intruction latencies has changed. Most
+// required. Well, because some instruction latencies has changed. Most
// noticeably those intensively used:
//
// Itanium Itanium2
// The loop therefore spins at the latency of xma minus 1, or in other
// words at 6*(n+4) ticks:-( Compare to the "production" loop above
// that runs in 2*(n+11) where the low latency problem is worked around
-// by moving the dependency to one-tick latent interger ALU. Note that
+// by moving the dependency to one-tick latent integer ALU. Note that
// "distance" between ldf8 and xma is not latency of ldf8, but the
// *difference* between xma and ldf8 latencies.
.L_bn_mul_words_ctop:
// This loop spins in 3*(n+10) ticks on Itanium and in 2*(n+10) on
// Itanium 2. Yes, unlike previous versions it scales:-) Previous
-// version was peforming *all* additions in IALU and was starving
+// version was performing *all* additions in IALU and was starving
// for those even on Itanium 2. In this version one addition is
// moved to FPU and is folded with multiplication. This is at cost
-// of propogating the result from previous call to this subroutine
+// of propagating the result from previous call to this subroutine
// to L2 cache... In other words negligible even for shorter keys.
// *Overall* performance improvement [over previous version] varies
// from 11 to 22 percent depending on key length.
// scalability. The decision will very likely be reconsidered after the
// benchmark program is profiled. I.e. if perfomance gain on Itanium
// will appear larger than loss on "wider" IA-64, then the loop should
-// be explicitely split and the epilogue compressed.
+// be explicitly split and the epilogue compressed.
.L_bn_sqr_words_ctop:
{ .mfi; (p16) ldf8 f32=[r33],8
(p25) xmpy.lu f42=f41,f41
// I've estimated this routine to run in ~120 ticks, but in reality
// (i.e. according to ar.itc) it takes ~160 ticks. Are those extra
// cycles consumed for instructions fetch? Or did I misinterpret some
-// clause in Itanium µ-architecture manual? Comments are welcomed and
+// clause in Itanium µ-architecture manual? Comments are welcomed and
// highly appreciated.
//
// On Itanium 2 it takes ~190 ticks. This is because of stalls on
// output: f8 = (int)(a/b)
// clobbered: f8,f9,f10,f11,pred
pred=p15
-// One can argue that this snippet is copyrighted to Intel
-// Corporation, as it's essentially identical to one of those
-// found in "Divide, Square Root and Remainder" section at
+// This snippet is based on text found in the "Divide, Square
+// Root and Remainder" section at
// http://www.intel.com/software/products/opensource/libraries/num.htm.
// Yes, I admit that the referred code was used as template,
// but after I realized that there hardly is any other instruction