On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 09:56:42AM +0200, Stephan Mueller wrote: > > The performance with ctr-aes-aesni on 64 bit is as follows -- I used my LRNG > implementation for testing for which I already have performance measurements: > > - generating smaller lengths (I tested up to 128 bytes) of random numbers > (which is the vast majority of random numbers to be generated), the > performance is even worse by 10 to 15% > > - generating larger lengths (tested with 4096 bytes) of random numbers, the > performance increases by 3% > > Using ctr(aes-aesni) on 32 bit, the numbers are generally worse by 5 to 10%. ctr(aes-aesni) is not the same thing as ctr-aes-aesni, the former being just another way of doing what you were doing. So did you actually test the real optimised version which is ctr-aes-aesni? Thanks, -- Email: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
