8000 [3.6] Remove nested comments in blake2 (GH-4173) by miss-islington · Pull Request #4214 · python/cpython · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]

Skip to content

[3.6] Remove nested comments in blake2 (GH-417 8000 3) #4214

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 1, 2017

Conversation

miss-islington
Copy link
Contributor

Replace occurence of nested comments in blake2 reference implementation
with preprocessor directive for disabling unused code.

blake2s-load-xop.h is conditionally pulled in only on chips with XOP
support, among others the AMD Bulldozer. The malformed comments in the
source file breaks the build of hashlib's _blake2 on GCC 6.3.0.

Official reference code on github uses GH-if so this change should be
uncontroversial.
(cherry picked from commit 388cd85)

Replace occurence of nested comments in blake2 reference implementation
with preprocessor directive for disabling unused code.

`blake2s-load-xop.h` is conditionally pulled in only on chips with XOP
support, among others the AMD Bulldozer. The malformed comments in the
source file breaks the build of `hashlib`'s `_blake2` on GCC 6.3.0.

Official reference code on github uses `GH-if` so this change should be
uncontroversial.
(cherry picked from commit 388cd85)
@miss-islington
Copy link
Contributor Author

@zao and @tiran: Backport status check is done, and it's a success ✅ .

@tiran tiran merged commit f44a629 into python:3.6 Nov 1, 2017
@miss-islington
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks, @tiran!

@miss-islington miss-islington deleted the backport-388cd85-3.6 branch November 1, 2017 12:58
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants
0