Matt Mackall wrote:
On Fri, Jun 08, 2007 at 05:42:53PM -0400, Benjamin Gilbert wrote:
Add x86-optimized implementation of the SHA-1 hash function, taken from
Nettle under the LGPL. This code will be enabled on kernels compiled for
486es or better; kernels which support 386es will use the generic
implementation (since we need BSWAP).
We disable building lib/sha1.o when an optimized implementation is
available, as the library link order for x86 (and x86_64) would otherwise
ignore the optimized version. The existing optimized implementation for ARM
does not do this; the library link order for that architecture appears to
favor the arch/arm/ version automatically. I've left this situation alone
since I'm not familiar with the ARM code, but a !ARM condition could be
added to CONFIG_SHA1_GENERIC if it makes sense.
The code has been tested with tcrypt and the NIST test vectors.
Have you benchmarked this against lib/sha1.c? Please post the results.
Until then, I'm frankly skeptical that your unrolled version is faster
because when I introduced lib/sha1.c the rolled version therein won by
a significant margin and had 1/10th the cache footprint.
Yes. And it also depends on the CPU as well. Testing on a server-class
x86 CPU (often with bigger L2, and perhaps even L1, cache) will produce
different result than from popular but less-capable "value" CPUs.
Jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
