Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20191211170936.385572-1-Jason@zx2c4.com> <20191212093008.217086-1-Jason@zx2c4.com>
 <d55e0390c7187b09f820e123b05df1e5e680df0b.camel@strongswan.org> <CAHmME9ovvwX3Or1ctRH8U5PjpNNMe9ixOZLi3F0vbO9SqA04Ow@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHmME9ovvwX3Or1ctRH8U5PjpNNMe9ixOZLi3F0vbO9SqA04Ow@mail.gmail.com>
From:   "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>
Date:   Thu, 12 Dec 2019 14:46:52 +0100
Message-ID: <CAHmME9reEXXSmQr+6vPM1cwr+pjvwPwJ5n3UZ0BUSjO2kQQcNg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH crypto-next v2 1/3] crypto: poly1305 - add new 32 and
 64-bit generic versions
To:     Martin Willi <martin@strongswan.org>
Cc:     Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 2:08 PM Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Martin,
>
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 1:03 PM Martin Willi <martin@strongswan.org> wrote:
> > Can you provide some numbers to testify that? In my tests, the 32-bit
> > version gives me exact the same results.
>
> On 32-bit, if you only call update() once, then the results are the
> same. However, as soon as you call it more than once, this new version
> has increasing gains. Other than that, they should behave pretty much
> identically.

Oh, you asked for numbers. I just fired up an Armada 370/XP and am
seeing a 8% increase in performance on calls to the update function.