From: Herbert Xu Subject: Re: [CRYPTO] is it really optimized ? Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 10:41:17 +1000 Message-ID: <20070417004117.GA16513@gondor.apana.org.au> References: <38b2ab8a0704140615y2ba8145bmd3c2316a41d99265@mail.gmail.com> <38b2ab8a0704141410q65f55381w26527aeb10fb4988@mail.gmail.com> <20070415075201.GA1644@gondor.apana.org.au> <38b2ab8a0704160137g1ef0713fl943c51ed9049212b@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: helge.hafting@aitel.hist.no, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org To: Francis Moreau Return-path: Received: from rhun.apana.org.au ([64.62.148.172]:1659 "EHLO arnor.apana.org.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754228AbXDQAl2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Apr 2007 20:41:28 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <38b2ab8a0704160137g1ef0713fl943c51ed9049212b@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-crypto.vger.kernel.org On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 10:37:01AM +0200, Francis Moreau wrote: > > BTW, here are figures I got with 2 different versions of the driver > when using tcrypt module. The second being the result with the > optimized driver (no key reloading on each block): > > normal version: > test 4 (128 bit key, 8192 byte blocks): 1 operation in 67991 cycles (8192 > bytes) > > optimized version: > test 4 (128 bit key, 8192 byte blocks): 1 operation in 51783 cycles (8192 > bytes) > > So the gain is 16000 cycles which seems to worth the change, isn't it ? Sounds like it would. It would help of course if you posted the patch :) Cheers, -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt