> A run on my laptop gave these results:
>     : ; ./util/shlib_wrap.sh apps/openssl speed siphash lhash
>     type             16 bytes     64 bytes    256 bytes   1024 bytes   8192 
> bytes  16384 bytes
>     lhash           147387.67k   147940.82k   144937.73k   147177.81k   
> 147095.55k   147679.91k
>     siphash         119939.99k   223694.38k   283383.30k   305372.84k   
> 311760.21k   312120.66k
> So it seems that for short strings, OPENSSL_LH_strhash (*) wins some,
> while siphash wins big for larger strings.

This is just *one* data point. Most notably what about 32-bit systems?
Another factor is code size, or rather time it takes to bring it into
cache, as well as what does it invalidate. Conventional benchmarks don't
tell you that, but it's only sensible to consider code size in
comparison to "typical" input size.

openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev

Reply via email to