In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tue, 09 Dec 2003 14:28:23 +0100, Andy Polyakov 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

appro> This is a poll for votes.
appro> 
appro> It was noted that [at least] Intel IA-32 compiler, linux-ia32-icc
appro> target, generates *noticeably*, 30% to be specific, faster code for SHA1
appro> than hand-coded assembler implementation on at least P4 platform. I have
appro> re-tuned SHA1 assembler implementation which now performs as following:
appro> 
appro>          compared with current   compared with icc
appro>          assembler impl.         generated code
appro> Pentium          -25%                    +37%
appro> PIII/AMD +8%                     +16%
appro> P4               +85%(!)                 +45%
appro> 
appro> Options for integrating re-tuned code are:
appro> 
appro> 1. replace crypto/sha/asm/sha1-586.pl and let couple of Pentium users
appro> suffer 25% performance loss;
appro> 2. add crypto/sha/asm/sha1-686.pl, make it default, so that couple of
appro> Pentium users *can* pull old code if they need 25% back;
appro> 3. add crypto/sha/asm/sha1-686.pl and have ./config choose between two
appro> versions, depending on which computer ./config is executed;

#1: +1

-----
Please consider sponsoring my work on free software.
See http://www.free.lp.se/sponsoring.html for details.
You don't have to be rich, a $10 donation is appreciated!

-- 
Richard Levitte   \ Tunnlandsv�gen 3  \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  \ S-168 36  BROMMA  \ T: +46-8-26 52 47
                    \      SWEDEN       \ or +46-708-26 53 44
Procurator Odiosus Ex Infernis                -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Member of the OpenSSL development team: http://www.openssl.org/

Unsolicited commercial email is subject to an archival fee of $400.
See <http://www.stacken.kth.se/~levitte/mail/> for more info.
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List                       [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager                           [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to