[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2016 23:29:12 +0100
From: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
To: kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
George Spelvin <linux@...encehorizons.net>, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Jason <Jason@...c4.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>, "Daniel J . Bernstein" <djb@...yp.to>,
Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@...il.com>, Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>,
Jean-Philippe Aumasson <jeanphilippe.aumasson@...il.com>,
Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>, Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>
Subject: Re: Re: HalfSipHash Acceptable Usage
On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 11:27 PM, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu> wrote:
> And "with enough registers" includes ARM and MIPS, right? So the only
> real problem is 32-bit x86, and you're right, at that point, only
> people who might care are people who are using a space-radiation
> hardened 386 --- and they're not likely to be doing high throughput
> TCP connections. :-)
Plus the benchmark was bogus anyway, and when I built a more specific
harness -- actually comparing the TCP sequence number functions --
SipHash was faster than MD5, even on register starved x86. So I think
we're fine and this chapter of the discussion can come to a close, in
order to move on to more interesting things.
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.
