Hi,
The OpenSSL status page, https://openssl.org/news/status.html, is a bit
out of date. According to it, the next minor releases are 0.9.8x,
1.0.0j, and 1.0.1c.
--
Iain Morgan
__
OpenSSL Project
for
download via HTTP and FTP from the following master locations (you
can find the various FTP mirrors under
http://www.openssl.org/source/mirror.html):
* http://www.openssl.org/source/
* ftp://ftp.openssl.org/source/
It seems to be missing from the FTP site.
--
Iain Morgan
PS
, from my perspective it would certainly be nice
to see a sponsor step up for a *nix platform using the AES-NI
instructions. It would seem to be a reasonable investment for one of the
major OS distributors. But that is just my opinion.
--
Iain Morgan
The views expressed above do not necessarily
= aesni_engine
[aesni_engine]
default_algorithms = ALL
Note also that with the recent creation of the 1.0.1 branch, there will
hopefully be a release version that includes the AES-NI support in the
near future. However, the support hasn't been backported yet.
--
Iain Morgan
).
Hmm, have you tried using lower-case names for the ciphers? This worked
for me:
$ ./config zlib no-rc2 no-idea no-seed no-des
$ make depend
$ make
Note that the build _did_ fail if no-rc4 was specified.
--
Iain Morgan
69178.15k70595.58k 150416.73k 151677.19k
Note the difference in the RC4 performance between these two systems
which are both nominally running at 3.0 GHz.
--
Iain Morgan
__
OpenSSL Project
I tested the 20090515 1.0 snapshot on both of the two systems mentioned
in the previous posts as well as several other Intel systems. In all of
the cases, the AES performance is now in the range I would expact.
Thanks
Iain
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 16:14:04 -0700, Iain Morgan wrote:
Hi Andy
(edx):0(eax));
printf(%08x:%08x:%08x:%08x\n,eax,ebx,ecx,edx);
if (max4) return 0;
eax=4; ecx=0;
__asm volatile (cpuid :
=a(eax),=b(ebx),=c(ecx),=d(edx):0(eax),2(ecx));
printf(%08x:%08x:%08x:%08x\n,eax,ebx,ecx,edx);
}
--
Iain Morgan
137297.92k
aes-256 cbc 67243.52k99031.17k 113838.59k 118624.75k 119619.58k
Thanks
--
Iain Morgan
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List
encountered this
problem a while back, but due to a lack of time I don't think
I reported it.
--
Iain Morgan
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List
of the intel compiler(10.0)?
Not yet, the system I'm building on does not have the 10.0 compilers.
However, that is something I intend to try.
--
Iain Morgan
__
OpenSSL Project http
to be
assembly was still assembly when using icc rather than gcc.
rick jones
I hadn't thought of comparing against something from SPECint,
but that's an interesting idea.
Yes, it does look like icc is using the assembly language code.
--
Iain Morgan
and is there a workaround other than switching
to gcc?
Thanks
--
Iain Morgan
cfe2.imorgan apps/openssl speed aes bf rc4 md5 sha 2/dev/null
OpenSSL 0.9.8e 23 Feb 2007
built on: Fri Jun 8 10:46:48 PDT 2007
options:bn(64,64) md2(int) rc4(ptr,int) des(idx,cisc,4,long) aes(partial)
idea(int
other than switching
to gcc?
Thanks
--
Iain Morgan
cfe2.imorgan apps/openssl speed aes bf rc4 md5 sha 2/dev/null
OpenSSL 0.9.8e 23 Feb 2007
built on: Fri Jun 8 10:46:48 PDT 2007
options:bn(64,64) md2(int) rc4(ptr,int) des(idx,cisc,4,long) aes(partial)
idea(int) blowfish(idx)
compiler: gcc
for your
CPU.
DS
The options used in the icc case were simply those set by
./Configure linux-ia64-icc. The one option that I added
was -i-static to force static linking to libimf.
--
Iain Morgan
__
OpenSSL Project
*as it becomes available* and report back. A.
Yes! That seems to do the trick.
--
Iain Morgan
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List openssl-dev
On Tue Jun 14 13:12:00 2005, Iain Morgan via RT wrote:
If OpenSSL is built with the 'no_asm' flag, the problem goes away.
Alternatively,
if RC4_CHAR is set and SZ in crypto/rc4/asm/rc4-ia64.S is changed from 4 to 1,
the problem also goes away.
Oops. These workarounds don't actually work
been filed as bug #1055 with the OpenSSH folks.
--
Iain Morgan
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org
Automated List Manager
Hi,
I was wondering if there is a timeframe for the release of 0.9.7f (or 0.9.8).
There's a project that I'm working on that would benefit from some of the
changes in the current 0.9.7 snapshot, but I'd prefer to use a release
version rather than a snapshot.
Thanks
--
Iain Morgan
. Cheers. A.
Yes, a back-port of the IA-64 stuff to 0.9.7 would be appreciated!
--
Iain Morgan
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL
20 matches
Mail list logo
