On Sun, Jun 10, 2007 at 12:47:19PM -0400, Benjamin Gilbert wrote:

quoted text
> Matt Mackall wrote:

> >On Sat, Jun 09, 2007 at 08:33:25PM -0400, Benjamin Gilbert wrote:

> >>It's not just the loop unrolling; it's the register allocation and

> >>spilling.  For comparison, I built SHATransform() from the

> >>drivers/char/random.c in 2.6.11, using gcc 3.3.5 with -O2 and

> >>SHA_CODE_SIZE == 3 (i.e., fully unrolled); I'm guessing this is pretty

> >>close to what you tested back then.  The resulting code is 49% MOV

> >>instructions, and 80% of *those* involve memory.  gcc4 is somewhat

> >>better, but it still spills a whole lot, both for the 2.6.11 unrolled

> >>code and for the current lib/sha1.c.

> >

> >Wait, your benchmark is comparing against the unrolled code?

>

> No, it's comparing the current lib/sha1.c to the optimized code in the

> patch.  I was just pointing out that the unrolled code you were likely

> testing against, back then, may not have been very good.  (Though I

> assumed that you were talking about the unrolled code in random.c, not

> the code in CryptoAPI, so that might change the numbers some.  It

> appears from the post you linked below that the unrolled CryptoAPI code

> still beat the rolled version?)

That predates lib/sha1.c by a while.
> >How big is the -code- footprint?

quoted text
>

> About 3700 bytes for the 32-bit version of sha_transform().

lib/sha1.c's footprint is... 621 bytes today. Huh. That's up from 466

bytes when it was introduced and no one's touched it:
http://search.luky.org/ML/linux-kernel.2005/msg06648.html
Stupid compilers.
But anyway. Cache footprint matters. The two big users of SHA1 in the

kernel are /dev/random and IPSec, both of which typically operate on

small chunks of data.
--

Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.

-

unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/