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out of date.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
s available 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
for any "no-asm" builds, and I don't
> expect to get any. It's not to late to sign additional platform
> sponsors, though (hint, hint).
>
> -Steve M.
>
To add to Steve's hint, from my perspective it would certainly be nice
to see a sponsor step up fo
ine_section
[engine_section]
aesni = 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
build when completing the make in ./crypto/(cipher).
>
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_ f
6.05k 177280.34k
aes-256 cbc 64822.50k69178.15k70595.58k 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
_
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 A
l.org
> Automated List Manager majord...@openssl.org
--
Iain Morgan
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List openssl-dev@o
t;=c"(ecx),"=d"(edx):"0"(eax));
> printf("%08x:%08x:%08x:%08x\n",eax,ebx,ecx,edx);
> if (max<4) return 0;
> eax=4; ecx=0;
> __asm volatile ("cpuid" :
> "=a"(eax),"=b"(ebx),"=c"(ec
7k 110940.37k 129796.27k 135063.56k 137297.92k
aes-256 cbc 67243.52k99031.17k 113838.59k 118624.75k 119619.58k
Thanks
--
Iain Morgan
__
OpenSSL Project http:/
to read it you'll always get 0. I can't
> recall the reason why .save ar.pfs,r0 lines were added, but essentially
> it's equivalent to "no-operation" and you should simply *remove* them.
> Do not replace r0 with anything, but simply
eral of the algorithms below.
>
> Is this a know issue 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
tuff that was supposed 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
> > I don't think -march=pentium4 is going to work on an IA64, and I have my
> > doubts about sse3 too.
> >
> > Note that IA64 is not an x86_64/amd64/x64.
> >
> >
> > Kurt
>
ization flags used,
> like -ip, -march=pentium4, -msse3, -xP, or whatever is appropriate for your
> CPU.
>
> DS
>
The options used in the icc case were simply those set by
./Configure linux-ia64-icc. The one option
round 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)
co
ssl-0.9.7-stable-SNAP-20050627.tar.gz
> *as it becomes available* and report back. A.
>
Yes! That seems to do the trick.
--
Iain Morgan
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development
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.
>
O
away.
This has also been filed as bug #1055 with the OpenSSH folks.
--
Iain Morgan
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org
Au
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
in
> commentary section], and might be at some later point. Cheers. A.
>
Yes, a back-port of the IA-64 stuff to 0.9.7 would be appreciated!
--
Iain Morgan
__
OpenSSL Project
21 matches
Mail list logo