Three SHA-256 implementations benchmarked on the same phone:
- sha256Android: Android's MessageDigest (BoringSSL + ARM64 CE hardware)
- sha256OurC: Our C SHA-256 (ARM64 CE hardware via JNI)
- sha256Kotlin: Kotlin's sha256 (platform MessageDigest on Android)
Also add nativeSha256 JNI method to expose our hardware SHA-256.
Why our C matches ACINQ on ARM64 despite different architectures:
- Our 4x64: 16 MUL+UMULH pairs per field mul
- ACINQ 5x52: 25 MUL+UMULH pairs per field mul
- We save 9 multiply pairs (~27ns on Cortex-X3) per fe_mul
- ACINQ saves ~6 normalizations with lazy reduction (~6ns)
- Net advantage: ~21ns per mul × 500 muls/verify > 0
- Plus our SHA-256 uses hardware CE, ACINQ's is software
https://claude.ai/code/session_011KVZhDcV2G7idNWEBz12GY
Claude
944562ddc8