From: Andy Polyakov <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 17:15:34 +0200

> What is rationale behind choosing interleave factor of two for
> parallelizable modes? Judging from aes-128 cbc encrypt benchmarks AES
> round instruction latency is 4. If processor can pair together two
> half-round instructions (I refer to fact that it takes two instructions
> to perform single round), then optimal interleave factor should be 4. Do
> you have performance metrics, specifically throughput, for instructions
> in question? Did you attempt higher interleave factor?

The AES round instruction latency is 3 cycles.

We don't have enough registers to unroll it by another factor, unless
we flush through the float registers reloading the KEY as we already
have to do for the 256-bit case with the 2 way unroll factor.

> Is ECB a "must have"? Are there critical applications? I mean it's
> probably lesser point to implement as much modes as possible...

It cost very little to support it, and I intend to support all modes
explicitly with AES for completeness.
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List                       [email protected]
Automated List Manager                           [email protected]

Reply via email to