From: Artur Skawina <art.08.09@gmail.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] block-sha1: improved SHA1 hashing
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 22:08:44 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A7B384C.2020407@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.01.0908061233360.3390@localhost.localdomain>
Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Thu, 6 Aug 2009, Artur Skawina wrote:
>> Oh, i noticed that '-mtune' makes quite a difference, it can change
>> the relative performance of the functions significantly, in unobvious
>> ways; depending on which cpu gcc tunes for (build config or -mtune);
>> some implementations slow down, others become a bit faster.
>
> That probably is mainly true for P4, although it's quite possible that it
> has an effect for just what the register allocator does, and then for
> spilling.
>
> And it looks like _all_ the tweakability is in the spilling. Nothing else
> matters.
>
> How does this patch work for you? It avoids doing that C-level register
> rotation, and instead rotates the register names with the preprocessor.
>
> I realize it's ugly as hell, but it does make it easier for gcc to see
> what's going on.
>
> The patch is against my git patches, but I think it should apply pretty
> much as-is to your sha1bench sources too. Does it make any difference for
> you?
it's a bit slower (P4):
before: linus 0.6288 97.06
after: linus 0.6604 92.42
i was trying similar things, like the example below, too, but it wasn't a
win on 32 bit...
artur
[the iteration below is functionally correct, but scheduling is most likely
fubared as it wasn't a win and i was checking how much a difference it made
on P4 -- ~-20..~0%, but never faster (relative to linusas2; it _is_ faster
than 'linus'. Dropped this version when merging your new preprocessor macros.]
@@ -125,6 +127,8 @@
#define W(x) (array[(x)&15])
#define SHA_XOR(t) \
TEMP = SHA_ROL(W(t+13) ^ W(t+8) ^ W(t+2) ^ W(t), 1); W(t) = TEMP;
+#define SHA_XOR2(t) \
+ SHA_ROL(W(t+13) ^ W(t+8) ^ W(t+2) ^ W(t), 1)
#define T_16_19(t) \
{ unsigned TEMP;\
@@ -139,10 +143,27 @@
#endif
#define T_20_39(t) \
- { unsigned TEMP;\
- SHA_XOR(t); \
- TEMP += (B^C^D) + E + 0x6ed9eba1; \
- E = D; D = C; C = SHA_ROR(B, 2); B = A; TEMP += SHA_ROL(A,5); A = TEMP; }
+ if (t%2==0) {\
+ unsigned TEMP;\
+ unsigned TEMP2;\
+ \
+ TEMP = SHA_XOR2(t); \
+ TEMP2 = SHA_XOR2(t+1); \
+ W(t) = TEMP;\
+ W(t+1) = TEMP2;\
+ TEMP += E + 0x6ed9eba1; \
+ E = C;\
+ TEMP += (B^E^D); \
+ TEMP2 += D + 0x6ed9eba1; \
+ D = SHA_ROR(B, 2);\
+ B = SHA_ROL(A, 5);\
+ B += TEMP;\
+ C = SHA_ROR(A, 2);\
+ A ^= E; \
+ A ^= D; \
+ A += TEMP2;\
+ A += SHA_ROL(B, 5);\
+ }
#if UNROLL
T_20_39(20); T_20_39(21); T_20_39(22); T_20_39(23); T_20_39(24);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-06 20:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-06 15:13 [PATCH 0/7] block-sha1: improved SHA1 hashing Linus Torvalds
2009-08-06 15:15 ` [PATCH 1/7] block-sha1: add new optimized C 'block-sha1' routines Linus Torvalds
2009-08-06 15:16 ` [PATCH 2/7] block-sha1: try to use rol/ror appropriately Linus Torvalds
2009-08-06 15:18 ` [PATCH 3/7] block-sha1: make the 'ntohl()' part of the first SHA1 loop Linus Torvalds
2009-08-06 15:20 ` [PATCH 4/7] block-sha1: re-use the temporary array as we calculate the SHA1 Linus Torvalds
2009-08-06 15:22 ` [PATCH 5/7] block-sha1: macroize the rounds a bit further Linus Torvalds
2009-08-06 15:24 ` [PATCH 6/7] block-sha1: Use '(B&C)+(D&(B^C))' instead of '(B&C)|(D&(B|C))' in round 3 Linus Torvalds
2009-08-06 15:25 ` [PATCH 7/7] block-sha1: get rid of redundant 'lenW' context Linus Torvalds
2009-08-06 18:25 ` [PATCH 2/7] block-sha1: try to use rol/ror appropriately Bert Wesarg
2009-08-06 17:22 ` [PATCH 0/7] block-sha1: improved SHA1 hashing Artur Skawina
2009-08-06 18:09 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-08-06 19:10 ` Artur Skawina
2009-08-06 19:41 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-08-06 20:08 ` Artur Skawina [this message]
2009-08-06 20:53 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-08-06 21:24 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-08-06 21:39 ` Artur Skawina
2009-08-06 21:52 ` Artur Skawina
2009-08-06 22:27 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-08-06 22:33 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-08-06 23:19 ` Artur Skawina
2009-08-06 23:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-08-06 22:55 ` Artur Skawina
2009-08-06 23:04 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-08-06 23:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-08-07 0:13 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-08-07 1:30 ` Artur Skawina
2009-08-07 1:55 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-08-07 0:53 ` Artur Skawina
2009-08-07 2:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-08-07 4:16 ` Artur Skawina
[not found] ` <alpine.LFD.2.01.0908071614310.3288@localhost.localdomain>
[not found] ` <4A7CBD28.6070306@gmail.com>
[not found] ` <4A7CBF47.9000903@gmail.com>
[not found] ` <alpine.LFD.2.01.0908071700290.3288@localhost.localdomain>
[not found] ` <4A7CC380.3070008@gmail.com>
2009-08-08 4:16 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-08-08 5:34 ` Artur Skawina
2009-08-08 17:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-08-08 18:12 ` Artur Skawina
2009-08-08 22:58 ` Artur Skawina
2009-08-08 23:36 ` Artur Skawina
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-08-07 7:36 George Spelvin
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=4A7B384C.2020407@gmail.com \
--to=art.08.09@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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.