Jan Just Keijser wrote:
Andy Polyakov wrote:
I
modified the 'Configure' script to allow the compilation of a 32bit
version of openssl *with* the assembly routines.
What does it mean? Configure supports 32-bit builds *with* assembly as
it is. To build 32-bit version on 64-bit Linux, run './Configure
linux-elf -m32'.
ah, I did not know about that option - I was looking for a specific
./Configure target ...
The results for this
version are on various Intel CPUs
Core2 E6550 (Conroe): 22 - 32 % speed up
Xeon E5440 (Harpertown): 24 - 33% speed up
Xeon X5660 (Westmere-EP): 19 - 27% speed up
i5-560M (Arrandale): 18 - 23 % speed up
What are the ranges? If we assume that largest coefficient is for
largest block size, then these are too high. What is the base line
exactly? Is it possible that you compare to compiler-generated code?
here are the raw 'openssl speed sha256' results with and without the
patch; all I did was
tar xzf openssl-1.0.0j.tar.gz
cd openssl-1.0.0j.tar.gz
<apply patch or not>
./Configure linux-elf -m32
make
cd apps
./openssl speed -evp sha256 | grep ^sha
./openssl speed sha256 | grep ^sha
This result is on a Core2duo T9300 laptop:
no patch:
sha256-evp 15721 42178 84527 113902 127184
sha256 26851 58249 97794 119593 127668
patch: sha256-evp
18178 51411 108741 150649 169099 sha256 34380
76627 130753 159497 171054
116% 122% 129% 132% 133%
128% 132% 134% 133% 134%
arrrgh, the output got mangled on my first post: here's a second attempt:
no patch:
sha256-evp 15721 42178 84527 113902 127184
sha256 26851 58249 97794 119593 127668
patch:
sha256-evp 18178 51411 108741 150649 169099
sha256 34380 76627 130753 159497 171054
116% 122% 129% 132% 133%
128% 132% 134% 133% 134%
JJK
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org
Automated List Manager majord...@openssl.org
