On Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 02:18:00PM +0200, Christian Kujau wrote: > Sorry, took me a while to retest. Thanks :) > Fruhwirth Clemens schrieb: > >would you like to benchmark > >http://clemens.endorphin.org/patches/aes-i586-asm-2.6.0-test5.diff > > yes, i did so, results on: > http://www.nerdbynature.de/bench/prinz/ Looks promising. But it's not going to be merged because of objections by the cryptoapi maintainer. > >http://clemens.endorphin.org/twofish-i586/ (experimential) > > uh, i guess this masm/windoze/elf32 stuff is too much for me, i could > try, but don't have time to dig into this. but you could try my script, > and run benchmarks on your machine too. > but: how is this twofish optimization supposed to go into mainline > anyway? one had to use a special compiling environment to compile a kernel? It's not a patch, it's an add-on. I'm working on a gas version of the assembler code so it can be merged, but it's far from being complete (although it works). > i set up these benchmarks for me too, because i needed to know what > cipher is fast enough for my own use. usually i sticked to serpent, now > aes-i586 looks quite good on this PC. i wonder if it will compile and so > something on ppc32 too, but probably not. which is a pity, because my > primary use of the cryptoloop is a ppc :-( Well that's the cost of an assembler implementation ;) it's not portable. Probably you can one of IBM's compilers to compile the cipher of your choice. http://www-3.ibm.com/software/awdtools/ccompilers/ ... Rumours say they're fast than gcc. Regards, Clemens
Attachment:
pgp00091.pgp
Description: PGP signature
