SHA256 performance optimized by RVV

[cxx194832]

Description

Please write a few sentences describing the overall goals of the pull request's commits.

PR checklist

Please remove the segment/s on either side of the | symbol as appropriate, and add any relevant link/s to the end of the line.
If the provided content is part of the present PR remove the # symbol.

• changelog provided | not required because:
• framework PR provided Mbed-TLS/mbedtls-framework# | not required
• mbedtls development PR provided Mbed-TLS/mbedtls# | not required because:
• mbedtls 3.6 PR provided Mbed-TLS/mbedtls# | not required because:
• tests provided | not required because:

Notes for the submitter

Please refer to the contributing guidelines, especially the
checklist for PR contributors.

Help make review efficient:

• Multiple simple commits
  • please structure your PR into a series of small commits, each of which does one thing
• Avoid force-push
  • please do not force-push to update your PR - just add new commit(s)
• See our Guidelines for Contributors for more details about the review process.

[cxx194832]

@gilles-peskine-arm
Hello Gills, I tried to upstream SHA256 algorithms optimized by RISC-V CVE INS for reference at beginning. Let's find a way to move ahead. Anything you want me to offer, Please notice me ASAP.

[cxx194832]

@gilles-peskine-arm I assume that the PR shall be merged into BRANCH-development.. but I found that there is a lot of commit without signed-off in such branch.. How to fix or shall I change a branch for further doing ?

[gilles-peskine-arm]

New commits need a sign-off line, but older commits didn't have one, and automatic merge commits from GitHub don't have one either. If the DCO check is green, it's fine.

[cxx194832]

New commits need a sign-off line, but older commits didn't have one, and automatic merge commits from GitHub don't have one either. If the DCO check is green, it's fine.

It's okay .. but for the below issue, shall I be waiting for the status change ?
F OpenCI: PR testsExpected — Waiting for status to be reported

[gilles-peskine-arm]

This is a big file, so as I wrote earlier, we wouldn't take it without review and tests. Until we have the CI infrastructure for RISC-V, there's not much point in doing a CI run.

[cxx194832]

This is a big file, so as I wrote earlier, we wouldn't take it without review and tests. Until we have the CI infrastructure for RISC-V, there's not much point in doing a CI run.

So, I have to be waiting for your RISC-V CI running up?