AES for CryptoAPI - i586-optimized
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): 20030708152755.GA24331@ghanima.endorphin.org.suse.lists.linux.kernel
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): [email protected]
Quoted 8 lines · Christoph Hellwig
Quoted 4 lines · Fruhwirth Clemens
Due to the recent discussion about the asm-optimized version of AES which is included in loop-AES, I'd like to point out that I've ported this implementation - Dr. Brian Gladman's btw. - to CryptoAPI a long time ago.
Cool, that means we just need to hash out the framework for optimized implementations now..
It's not cool. Pentium Classic tuning is quite useless for PPro+ The Pentium Classic had a quite weird pipeline and code optimized for it tends to be suboptimal for more modern designs.
I didn't benchmark, but I suspect the C version compiled with a good compiler for the correct CPU is faster than that on a modern CPU.
-Andi
Quoted 11 lines · Andi Kleen
Quoted 8 lines · Christoph Hellwig
Quoted 4 lines · Fruhwirth Clemens
Due to the recent discussion about the asm-optimized version of AES which is included in loop-AES, I'd like to point out that I've ported this implementation - Dr. Brian Gladman's btw. - to CryptoAPI a long time ago.
Cool, that means we just need to hash out the framework for optimized implementations now..
Quoted 6 lines
It's not cool. Pentium Classic tuning is quite useless for PPro+ The Pentium Classic had a quite weird pipeline and code optimized for it tends to be suboptimal for more modern designs.
I didn't benchmark, but I suspect the C version compiled with a good compiler for the correct CPU is faster than that on a modern CPU.
I agree 100% with what you state here... but at the same time I was thinking it would be nice to merge, mainly as an example of asm support if nothing else.
We really need to see benchmarks before merging, too, to see (as you state) if the C compiler still does a better job.
Jeff
Quoted 3 lines · On Tue, 8 Jul 2003 13:28:48 -0400 Jeff Garzik <[email protected]> wrote:
I agree 100% with what you state here... but at the same time I was thinking it would be nice to merge, mainly as an example of asm support if nothing else.
There already is an example for optimized variants - the z990 implementation.
-Andi