Re: [PATCH -mm crypto] AES: x86_64 asm implementation optimization

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: dean gaudet
Date: Saturday, May 3, 2008 - 11:25 pm

one of the more important details in evaluating these changes would be the 
family/model/stepping of the processors being microbenchmarked... could 
you folks include /proc/cpuinfo with the results?

also -- please drop the #define for R16 to %rsp ... it obfuscates more 
than it helps anything.

thanks
-dean

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008, Sebastian Siewior wrote:

--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [PATCH -mm crypto] AES: x86_64 asm implementation opti ..., Sebastian Siewior, (Wed Apr 16, 12:31 am)
Re: [PATCH -mm crypto] AES: x86_64 asm implementation opti ..., Sebastian Siewior, (Wed Apr 16, 11:40 am)
Re: [PATCH -mm crypto] AES: x86_64 asm implementation opti ..., Sebastian Siewior, (Wed Apr 23, 3:28 pm)
Re: [PATCH -mm crypto] AES: x86_64 asm implementation opti ..., Sebastian Siewior, (Wed Apr 23, 3:32 pm)
Re: [PATCH -mm crypto] AES: x86_64 asm implementation opti ..., Sebastian Siewior, (Fri Apr 25, 12:12 am)
Re: [PATCH -mm crypto] AES: x86_64 asm implementation opti ..., Sebastian Siewior, (Fri Apr 25, 12:37 am)
Re: [PATCH -mm crypto] AES: x86_64 asm implementation opti ..., Sebastian Siewior, (Tue Apr 29, 3:12 pm)
Re: [PATCH -mm crypto] AES: x86_64 asm implementation opti ..., dean gaudet, (Sat May 3, 11:25 pm)