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]
Message-ID: <20110316181023.2090.qmail@science.horizon.com>
Date:	16 Mar 2011 14:10:23 -0400
From:	"George Spelvin" <linux@...izon.com>
To:	hughd@...gle.com, linux@...izon.com
Cc:	herbert@...dor.hengli.com.au, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, mpm@...enic.com, penberg@...helsinki.fi
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] drivers/random: Cache align ip_random better

> I'm intrigued: please educate me.  On what architectures does cache-
> aligning a 48-byte buffer (previously offset by 4 bytes) speed up
> copying from it, and why?  Does the copying involve 8-byte or 16-byte
> instructions that benefit from that alignment, rather than cacheline
> alignment?

I had two thoughts in my head when I wrote that:
1) A smart compiler could note the alignment and issue wider copy
   instructions.  (Especially on alignment-required architectures.)
2) The cacheline fetch would get more data faster.  The data would
   be transferred in the first 6 beats of the load from RAM (assuming a
   64-bit data bus) rather than waiting for 7, so you'd finish the copy
   1 ns sooner or so.  Similar 1-cycle win on a 128-bit Ln->L(n-1) cache
   transfer.

As I said, "infinitesimal".  The main reason that I bothered to
generate a patch was that it appealed to my sense of neatness to
keep the 3x16-byte buffer 16-byte aligned.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ