Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265109AbTIJQW1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Sep 2003 12:22:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265149AbTIJQW0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Sep 2003 12:22:26 -0400 Received: from havoc.gtf.org ([63.247.75.124]:64405 "EHLO havoc.gtf.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265109AbTIJQWU (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Sep 2003 12:22:20 -0400 Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 12:17:38 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik To: Fruhwirth Clemens Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cryptoapi-devel@kerneli.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] AES i586-asm optimized Message-ID: <20030910161738.GA29990@gtf.org> References: <20030910153859.GA17919@leto2.endorphin.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030910153859.GA17919@leto2.endorphin.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1513 Lines: 50 On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 05:38:59PM +0200, Fruhwirth Clemens wrote: > This patch[1] adds an i586 assembler optimized version of the Rijndael (AES) > cipher. Please have a look, try, and criticise. > > Before starting the old "do we need assembler" thread again: > As tested by hvr[2] this implemention is significantly faster than the C > version. Tested on what processors? With what kernel config? I would be surprised if a 586-optimized asm was useful on P4. > Guys, the linux kernel doesn't even compile with icc (Intel C > compiler) Wrong. As Intel pointed out on linux-kernel less than 24 hours ago, even. > These are the raw numbers. Assembler is faster. gcc generates assembler, so this is nonsensical ;-) > And before we start to discuss a sophisticated framework for assembler > implemention or automatic selection of implementions or preferences by > application for a particular implemention and so one: This is the first > assembler implemention and most likely the last for a long time. Nope, S/390 folks beat ya to it. And I'm working on something as well. > So I think > with this perspective it's not worth delaying this feature, especially > because after this module disk encryption becomes reasonable. In your opinion. Jeff - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/