Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 10:56:20 +0200 From: Katja Malvoni <kmalvoni@...il.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Parallella: bcrypt Hi Alexander, On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 5:15 PM, Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> wrote: > Katja, > > On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 04:54:31PM +0200, Katja Malvoni wrote: > > 26c: 905f 4806 lsl r20,r20,0x2 > > 270: 2456 lsl r1,r1,0x2 > > We should be able to avoid needing these instructions if you pick the > version of the BF_ROUND macro that's intended for archs without scaled > index on loads. The crypt_blowfish.c file in musl doesn't include it, > so you'll need to take it from our separate crypt_blowfish distribution. > > In fact, here it is: > [...] > Another optimization to try is unrolling more rounds. The loop in > musl's BF_encrypt() unrolls only two rounds, but it has that "#if 0" > block with all 16 unrolled - would the code still fit if you change it > to "#if 1"? Perhaps it would. > With other version of BF_ROUND macro and with "#if 1" execution speed on one core is 39.131000 ms and 288.555000 ms on all cores. Yaniv, what is the most efficient way to measure execution time of BF_crypt call on Epiphany core? Using timer in clk mode? CTIMER0 is 32-bit register? Katja Content of type "text/html" skipped
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.