linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] bitreversal program

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 21 May 2008 11:11:11 +0200
From:	Benoit Boissinot <bboissin@...il.com>
To:	Soumyadip Das Mahapatra <kernelhacker@...ualserver.org>
Cc:	Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@...il.com>,
	Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] bitreversal program

On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 10:54:15AM +0200, Soumyadip Das Mahapatra wrote:
> On Tue, 20 May 2008, Benoit Boissinot wrote:
>
> Sorry to disturb you again. But i tested my code against Akinobu's one
> and the test result shows my code takes less cpu time than that of
> Akinobu's.
>
> My processor is 1.4 GHz one.
> I am not forcing you to review my code( or i've no expectation of
> inclusion of it ) but its just a curiousity: what is truth behind
> the output.

I'm using a core duo 1.2GHz, if you want to play with the code, I'm
attaching a tarball (it's hackish, just change the #include at the top
of bitrev.h to switch implementation).

I'm using gcc -Wall -O3 to compile with gcc 4.2.3.

regards,

Benoit

-- 
:wq

Download attachment "bitrev.tar.bz2" of type "application/octet-stream" (1520 bytes)