Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2016 11:41:28 -0500 From: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com> To: kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, Jason@...c4.com, linux@...encehorizons.net Cc: ak@...ux.intel.com, davem@...emloft.net, David.Laight@...lab.com, djb@...yp.to, ebiggers3@...il.com, eric.dumazet@...il.com, hannes@...essinduktion.org, jeanphilippe.aumasson@...il.com, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, luto@...capital.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, tom@...bertland.com, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, tytso@....edu, vegard.nossum@...il.com Subject: Re: Re: HalfSipHash Acceptable Usage On Wed, 2016-12-21 at 10:55 -0500, George Spelvin wrote: > Actually, DJB just made a very relevant suggestion. > > As I've mentioned, the 32-bit performance problems are an x86- > specific > problem. ARM does very well, and other processors aren't bad at all. > > SipHash fits very nicely (and runs very fast) in the MMX registers. > > They're 64 bits, and there are 8 of them, so the integer registers > can > be reserved for pointers and loop counters and all that. And there's > reference code available. > > How much does kernel_fpu_begin()/kernel_fpu_end() cost? Those can be very expensive. Almost certainly not worth it for small amounts of data. -- All Rights Reversed. Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (474 bytes)
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.