> 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
