From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
To: Zhihang Shao <zhihang.shao.iscas@gmail.com>
Cc: alex@ghiti.fr, appro@cryptogams.org, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au,
linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
paul.walmsley@sifive.com, zhang.lyra@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] crypto: riscv/poly1305 - import OpenSSL/CRYPTOGAMS implementation
Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2025 10:22:58 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250720172258.GA1153@sol> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACGDn=Rn079JhB7dwqbC-3GNiydJs=dGEXtcw+cC8z2Yjp2Qbg@mail.gmail.com>
On Sun, Jul 20, 2025 at 05:10:13PM +0800, Zhihang Shao wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> I recently ran a test using the Kunit module you wrote for testing
> poly1305, which I executed on QEMU RISC-V 64, . The results show a
> significant performance improvement of the optimized implementation
> compared to the generic one. The test data are as follows:
>
> --- base.log 2025-07-19 17:41:06.443392989 +0800
> +++ optimized.log 2025-07-19 17:40:45.650048601 +0800
> @@ -1,31 +1,31 @@
> -[ 0.668631] # Subtest: poly1305
> -[ 0.668774] # module: poly1305_kunit
> -[ 0.668857] 1..12
> -[ 0.670267] ok 1 test_hash_test_vectors
> -[ 0.679479] ok 2 test_hash_all_lens_up_to_4096
> -[ 0.696048] ok 3 test_hash_incremental_updates
> -[ 0.697645] ok 4 test_hash_buffer_overruns
> -[ 0.701060] ok 5 test_hash_overlaps
> -[ 0.702858] ok 6 test_hash_alignment_consistency
> -[ 0.703108] ok 7 test_hash_ctx_zeroization
> -[ 0.846150] ok 8 test_hash_interrupt_context_1
> -[ 1.235247] ok 9 test_hash_interrupt_context_2
> -[ 1.250813] ok 10 test_poly1305_allones_keys_and_message
> -[ 1.251138] ok 11 test_poly1305_reduction_edge_cases
> -[ 1.287196] # benchmark_hash: len=1: 2 MB/s
> -[ 1.305363] # benchmark_hash: len=16: 61 MB/s
> -[ 1.321102] # benchmark_hash: len=64: 212 MB/s
> -[ 1.340105] # benchmark_hash: len=127: 263 MB/s
> -[ 1.353880] # benchmark_hash: len=128: 364 MB/s
> -[ 1.370118] # benchmark_hash: len=200: 377 MB/s
> -[ 1.381879] # benchmark_hash: len=256: 570 MB/s
> -[ 1.394125] # benchmark_hash: len=511: 657 MB/s
> -[ 1.404265] # benchmark_hash: len=512: 794 MB/s
> -[ 1.413356] # benchmark_hash: len=1024: 985 MB/s
> -[ 1.421925] # benchmark_hash: len=3173: 1131 MB/s
> -[ 1.429956] # benchmark_hash: len=4096: 1218 MB/s
> -[ 1.438184] # benchmark_hash: len=16384: 1216 MB/s
> -[ 1.438462] ok 12 benchmark_hash
> -[ 1.438686] # poly1305: pass:12 fail:0 skip:0 total:12
> -[ 1.438763] # Totals: pass:12 fail:0 skip:0 total:12
> -[ 1.438904] ok 1 poly1305
> +[ 0.666280] # Subtest: poly1305
> +[ 0.666413] # module: poly1305_kunit
> +[ 0.666490] 1..12
> +[ 0.667702] ok 1 test_hash_test_vectors
> +[ 0.672896] ok 2 test_hash_all_lens_up_to_4096
> +[ 0.686244] ok 3 test_hash_incremental_updates
> +[ 0.687263] ok 4 test_hash_buffer_overruns
> +[ 0.689957] ok 5 test_hash_overlaps
> +[ 0.691393] ok 6 test_hash_alignment_consistency
> +[ 0.691622] ok 7 test_hash_ctx_zeroization
> +[ 0.769741] ok 8 test_hash_interrupt_context_1
> +[ 0.930832] ok 9 test_hash_interrupt_context_2
> +[ 0.940068] ok 10 test_poly1305_allones_keys_and_message
> +[ 0.940478] ok 11 test_poly1305_reduction_edge_cases
> +[ 0.964546] # benchmark_hash: len=1: 3 MB/s
> +[ 0.978836] # benchmark_hash: len=16: 78 MB/s
> +[ 0.990414] # benchmark_hash: len=64: 289 MB/s
> +[ 1.003012] # benchmark_hash: len=127: 397 MB/s
> +[ 1.012755] # benchmark_hash: len=128: 517 MB/s
> +[ 1.022928] # benchmark_hash: len=200: 603 MB/s
> +[ 1.030981] # benchmark_hash: len=256: 835 MB/s
> +[ 1.038706] # benchmark_hash: len=511: 1046 MB/s
> +[ 1.045233] # benchmark_hash: len=512: 1240 MB/s
> +[ 1.050733] # benchmark_hash: len=1024: 1638 MB/s
> +[ 1.055620] # benchmark_hash: len=3173: 1998 MB/s
> +[ 1.060247] # benchmark_hash: len=4096: 2132 MB/s
> +[ 1.064695] # benchmark_hash: len=16384: 2267 MB/s
> +[ 1.065179] ok 12 benchmark_hash
> +[ 1.065425] # poly1305: pass:12 fail:0 skip:0 total:12
> +[ 1.065498] # Totals: pass:12 fail:0 skip:0 total:12
> +[ 1.065612] ok 1 poly1305
>
> Next, I plan to validate this performance gain on actual RISC-V
> hardware. I will also submit a v5 patch to the mailing list.
> Look forward to your feedback and suggestions.
>
Sounds good, thank you!
- Eric
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
To: Zhihang Shao <zhihang.shao.iscas@gmail.com>
Cc: alex@ghiti.fr, appro@cryptogams.org, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au,
linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
paul.walmsley@sifive.com, zhang.lyra@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] crypto: riscv/poly1305 - import OpenSSL/CRYPTOGAMS implementation
Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2025 10:22:58 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250720172258.GA1153@sol> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACGDn=Rn079JhB7dwqbC-3GNiydJs=dGEXtcw+cC8z2Yjp2Qbg@mail.gmail.com>
On Sun, Jul 20, 2025 at 05:10:13PM +0800, Zhihang Shao wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> I recently ran a test using the Kunit module you wrote for testing
> poly1305, which I executed on QEMU RISC-V 64, . The results show a
> significant performance improvement of the optimized implementation
> compared to the generic one. The test data are as follows:
>
> --- base.log 2025-07-19 17:41:06.443392989 +0800
> +++ optimized.log 2025-07-19 17:40:45.650048601 +0800
> @@ -1,31 +1,31 @@
> -[ 0.668631] # Subtest: poly1305
> -[ 0.668774] # module: poly1305_kunit
> -[ 0.668857] 1..12
> -[ 0.670267] ok 1 test_hash_test_vectors
> -[ 0.679479] ok 2 test_hash_all_lens_up_to_4096
> -[ 0.696048] ok 3 test_hash_incremental_updates
> -[ 0.697645] ok 4 test_hash_buffer_overruns
> -[ 0.701060] ok 5 test_hash_overlaps
> -[ 0.702858] ok 6 test_hash_alignment_consistency
> -[ 0.703108] ok 7 test_hash_ctx_zeroization
> -[ 0.846150] ok 8 test_hash_interrupt_context_1
> -[ 1.235247] ok 9 test_hash_interrupt_context_2
> -[ 1.250813] ok 10 test_poly1305_allones_keys_and_message
> -[ 1.251138] ok 11 test_poly1305_reduction_edge_cases
> -[ 1.287196] # benchmark_hash: len=1: 2 MB/s
> -[ 1.305363] # benchmark_hash: len=16: 61 MB/s
> -[ 1.321102] # benchmark_hash: len=64: 212 MB/s
> -[ 1.340105] # benchmark_hash: len=127: 263 MB/s
> -[ 1.353880] # benchmark_hash: len=128: 364 MB/s
> -[ 1.370118] # benchmark_hash: len=200: 377 MB/s
> -[ 1.381879] # benchmark_hash: len=256: 570 MB/s
> -[ 1.394125] # benchmark_hash: len=511: 657 MB/s
> -[ 1.404265] # benchmark_hash: len=512: 794 MB/s
> -[ 1.413356] # benchmark_hash: len=1024: 985 MB/s
> -[ 1.421925] # benchmark_hash: len=3173: 1131 MB/s
> -[ 1.429956] # benchmark_hash: len=4096: 1218 MB/s
> -[ 1.438184] # benchmark_hash: len=16384: 1216 MB/s
> -[ 1.438462] ok 12 benchmark_hash
> -[ 1.438686] # poly1305: pass:12 fail:0 skip:0 total:12
> -[ 1.438763] # Totals: pass:12 fail:0 skip:0 total:12
> -[ 1.438904] ok 1 poly1305
> +[ 0.666280] # Subtest: poly1305
> +[ 0.666413] # module: poly1305_kunit
> +[ 0.666490] 1..12
> +[ 0.667702] ok 1 test_hash_test_vectors
> +[ 0.672896] ok 2 test_hash_all_lens_up_to_4096
> +[ 0.686244] ok 3 test_hash_incremental_updates
> +[ 0.687263] ok 4 test_hash_buffer_overruns
> +[ 0.689957] ok 5 test_hash_overlaps
> +[ 0.691393] ok 6 test_hash_alignment_consistency
> +[ 0.691622] ok 7 test_hash_ctx_zeroization
> +[ 0.769741] ok 8 test_hash_interrupt_context_1
> +[ 0.930832] ok 9 test_hash_interrupt_context_2
> +[ 0.940068] ok 10 test_poly1305_allones_keys_and_message
> +[ 0.940478] ok 11 test_poly1305_reduction_edge_cases
> +[ 0.964546] # benchmark_hash: len=1: 3 MB/s
> +[ 0.978836] # benchmark_hash: len=16: 78 MB/s
> +[ 0.990414] # benchmark_hash: len=64: 289 MB/s
> +[ 1.003012] # benchmark_hash: len=127: 397 MB/s
> +[ 1.012755] # benchmark_hash: len=128: 517 MB/s
> +[ 1.022928] # benchmark_hash: len=200: 603 MB/s
> +[ 1.030981] # benchmark_hash: len=256: 835 MB/s
> +[ 1.038706] # benchmark_hash: len=511: 1046 MB/s
> +[ 1.045233] # benchmark_hash: len=512: 1240 MB/s
> +[ 1.050733] # benchmark_hash: len=1024: 1638 MB/s
> +[ 1.055620] # benchmark_hash: len=3173: 1998 MB/s
> +[ 1.060247] # benchmark_hash: len=4096: 2132 MB/s
> +[ 1.064695] # benchmark_hash: len=16384: 2267 MB/s
> +[ 1.065179] ok 12 benchmark_hash
> +[ 1.065425] # poly1305: pass:12 fail:0 skip:0 total:12
> +[ 1.065498] # Totals: pass:12 fail:0 skip:0 total:12
> +[ 1.065612] ok 1 poly1305
>
> Next, I plan to validate this performance gain on actual RISC-V
> hardware. I will also submit a v5 patch to the mailing list.
> Look forward to your feedback and suggestions.
>
Sounds good, thank you!
- Eric
_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-20 17:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-20 9:10 [PATCH v4] crypto: riscv/poly1305 - import OpenSSL/CRYPTOGAMS implementation Zhihang Shao
2025-07-20 9:10 ` Zhihang Shao
2025-07-20 17:22 ` Eric Biggers [this message]
2025-07-20 17:22 ` Eric Biggers
2025-07-23 9:47 ` Andy Polyakov
2025-07-23 9:47 ` Andy Polyakov
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2025-06-11 3:31 Zhihang Shao
2025-06-11 3:31 ` Zhihang Shao
2025-06-24 3:50 ` Eric Biggers
2025-06-24 3:50 ` Eric Biggers
2025-06-24 9:13 ` Andy Polyakov
2025-06-24 9:13 ` Andy Polyakov
2025-06-25 3:54 ` Eric Biggers
2025-06-25 3:54 ` Eric Biggers
2025-06-25 9:38 ` Andy Polyakov
2025-06-25 9:38 ` Andy Polyakov
2025-06-26 15:58 ` Sami Tolvanen
2025-06-26 15:58 ` Sami Tolvanen
2025-06-27 9:07 ` Andy Polyakov
2025-06-27 9:07 ` Andy Polyakov
2025-06-27 16:10 ` Sami Tolvanen
2025-06-27 16:10 ` Sami Tolvanen
2025-06-27 21:51 ` Eric Biggers
2025-06-27 21:51 ` Eric Biggers
2025-06-30 9:55 ` Andy Polyakov
2025-06-30 9:55 ` Andy Polyakov
2025-06-24 11:08 ` Andy Polyakov
2025-06-24 11:08 ` Andy Polyakov
2025-07-06 23:35 ` Eric Biggers
2025-07-06 23:35 ` Eric Biggers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20250720172258.GA1153@sol \
--to=ebiggers@kernel.org \
--cc=alex@ghiti.fr \
--cc=appro@cryptogams.org \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=paul.walmsley@sifive.com \
--cc=zhang.lyra@gmail.com \
--cc=zhihang.shao.iscas@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.