linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] crypto: fix FTBFS with ARM SHA1-asm and THUMB2

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: <20130122095021.89432qdbeu32a4sg@www.dalek.fi>
Date:	Tue, 22 Jan 2013 09:50:21 +0200
From:	Jussi Kivilinna <jussi.kivilinna@...et.fi>
To:	Jussi Kivilinna <jussi.kivilinna@...et.fi>
Cc:	Matt Sealey <matt@...esi-usa.com>,
	Nicolas Pitre <nico@...xnic.net>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Linux ARM Kernel ML <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Dave Martin <dave.martin@...aro.org>,
	David McCullough <david_mccullough@...fee.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] crypto: fix FTBFS with ARM SHA1-asm and THUMB2_KERNEL

Quoting Jussi Kivilinna <jussi.kivilinna@...et.fi>:

> Quoting Matt Sealey <matt@...esi-usa.com>:
>
>> This question is to the implementor/committer (Dave McCullough), how
>> exactly did you measure the benchmark and can we reproduce it on some
>> other ARM box?
>>
>> If it's long and laborious and not so important to test the IPsec
>> tunnel use-case, what would be the simplest possible benchmark to see
>> if the C vs. assembly version is faster for a particular ARM device? I
>> can get hold of pretty much any Cortex-A8 or Cortex-A9 that matters, I
>> have access to a Chromebook for A15, and maybe an i.MX27 or i.MX35 and
>> a couple Marvell boards (ARMv6) if I set my mind to it... that much
>> testing implies we find a pretty concise benchmark though with a
>> fairly common kernel version we can spread around (i.MX, OMAP and the
>> Chromebook, I can handle, the rest I'm a little wary of bothering to
>> spend too much time on). I think that could cover a good swath of
>> not-ARMv5 use cases from lower speeds to quad core monsters.. but I
>> might stick to i.MX to start with..
>
> There is 'tcrypt' module in crypto/ for quick benchmarking.  
> 'modprobe tcrypt mode=500 sec=1' tests AES in various cipher-modes,  
> using different buffer sizes and outputs results to kernel log.
>

Actually mode=200 might be better, as mode=500 is for asynchronous  
implementations and might use hardware crypto if such device/module is  
available.

-Jussi


--
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/