Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 22:27:16 +0200 From: Katja Malvoni <kmalvoni@...il.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Parallella: bcrypt On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 9:15 PM, Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> wrote: > > > What is the overhead in case that S-boxes are hard coded in the device > > code? > > What do you mean by this? > I'm sorry, I expressed myself wrongly. What I meant is what if I put S-boxes in the device code instead of transferring them from the host memory. I assumed that it gets transferred to the core in a different way than transferring it from the host using e_write(). But: On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 8:31 PM, Yaniv Sapir <yaniv@...pteva.com> wrote: > e_load() actually used e_write() to load the chip with the program image, so it should be just as efficient to load the S-boxes as it > would be to write them. Note that is the S-boxes do not change, than you may be able to keep it in memory, in case you need to > load a different program. Katja
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.