[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: AES performance results
- To: or-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Nick Mathewson" <nickm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: AES performance results
- From: "Adam Langley" <agl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 17:05:23 -0800
- Delivered-to: archiver@seul.org
- Delivered-to: or-dev-outgoing@seul.org
- Delivered-to: or-dev@seul.org
- Delivery-date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 20:05:39 -0500
- Dkim-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=BaWugE1QGbwrF2GTrqxGsCatLYgkJVDR0UMVyO8hyDG0c8cFwHHudL3rdbDLN4Pmh/avwjzKlVkD8/vofdHX+RbGZZFZGFalYNcIgHwTMpAXboCfOXi5OsM4XGMZwuuzHfXTwhnwpY3yFux94szC1BEBOvhudcnNgL+6ejutVPY=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=S73LvJy7uAYJVVdQf1PzrAzEGu1FgXY2yftDF+BSvdfJzV59HMPc4ZXLwEncSpehYg8B91OWccaGgwGiPp6UlIe3WJA3vlNf7UmV1K0AxJVQNqzFVENOIfoWU4imFnbiXuhfhzuNlVFd/Jd2bUM9Huqp9NFmvZTHr0QTGYKQ+hI=
- In-reply-to: <20070227000657.GJ16943@totoro.wangafu.net>
- References: <20070227000657.GJ16943@totoro.wangafu.net>
- Reply-to: or-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-or-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
On 2/26/07, Nick Mathewson <nickm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
METHODOLOGY: I wrote a stupid benchmark function in aes.c to encrypt a
million cell-sized chunks using our aes_crypt function, and timed it
with the unix "time" command. I did this twice for each
(computer,code) pair, I took the median of three runs.
You have to be very careful of cache issues with micro-benchmarks like
that. I'm think that you're ok because the cache profile of an AES
function is probably pretty much fixed (it walks the input and the
output and the tables are of fixed size I'm guessing). But if the
faster impl uses different sized tables etc (or more code, looking at
FULL_UNROLL) you might find that, when running with the rest of the
Tor code, the results are rather different.
AGL
--
Adam Langley agl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.imperialviolet.org 650-283-9641