From: "Pádraig Brady" <P@draigBrady.com>
To: Bug-coreutils@gnu.org, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Linus' sha1 is much faster!
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 00:25:36 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A85F270.20703@draigBrady.com> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1110 bytes --]
I've noticed before that coreutils hashing utils
were a little behind in performance, but was prompted
to look at it again when I noticed the recently
updated sha1 implementation in git:
http://git.kernel.org/?p=git/git.git;a=history;f=block-sha1;h=d3121f7;hb=pu
Testing that with the attached program which I wrote
in a couple of mins to try and match sha1sum's system calls
shows that it's around 33% faster, as shown below:
$ gcc $(rpm -q --qf="%{OPTFLAGS}\n" coreutils) linus-sha1.c sha1.c -o linus-sha1
$ time ./linus-sha1 300MB_file
df1e19e245fee4f53087b50ef953ca2c8d1644d7 300MB_file
real 0m2.742s
user 0m2.516s
sys 0m0.206s
$ time ~/git/coreutils/src/sha1sum 300MB_file
df1e19e245fee4f53087b50ef953ca2c8d1644d7 300MB_file
real 0m4.166s
user 0m3.846s
sys 0m0.298s
So, could we use that code in coreutils?
Think of all the dead fish it would save.
I've also attached a trivial block-sha1 patch which doesn't
affect performance, but does suppress a signed unsigned
comparison warning which occurs with -Wextra for example.
cheers,
Pádraig.
[-- Attachment #2: linus-sha1.c --]
[-- Type: text/x-csrc, Size: 681 bytes --]
/* gcc -O2 -Wall linus-sha1.c sha1.c -o linus-sha1 */
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include "sha1.h"
int main(int argc, char** argv)
{
if (argc != 2) return 1;
const char* filename = argv[1];
FILE *fp = fopen (filename, "r");
if (!fp) return 1;
#define BS 4096 /* match coreutils */
blk_SHA_CTX ctx;
blk_SHA1_Init(&ctx);
size_t nr;
char buf[BS];
while ((nr=fread_unlocked(buf, 1, sizeof(buf), fp)))
blk_SHA1_Update(&ctx, buf, nr);
unsigned char hash[20];
blk_SHA1_Final(hash, &ctx);
int i;
for (i=0; i<sizeof(hash); i++)
printf("%02x",*(hash+i));
printf(" %s\n", filename);
return 0;
}
[-- Attachment #3: block-sha1-signed-warning.diff --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 998 bytes --]
>From fa75e818836f763357ff9b7bbde3327e1aabbe47 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: =?utf-8?q?P=C3=A1draig=20Brady?= <P@draigBrady.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 00:17:30 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] block-sha1: suppress signed unsigned comparison warning
* block-sha1/sha1.c: Use unsigned ints as the values
will never go negative.
---
block-sha1/sha1.c | 4 ++--
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/block-sha1/sha1.c b/block-sha1/sha1.c
index d3121f7..be763d8 100644
--- a/block-sha1/sha1.c
+++ b/block-sha1/sha1.c
@@ -231,13 +231,13 @@ void blk_SHA1_Init(blk_SHA_CTX *ctx)
void blk_SHA1_Update(blk_SHA_CTX *ctx, const void *data, unsigned long len)
{
- int lenW = ctx->size & 63;
+ unsigned int lenW = ctx->size & 63;
ctx->size += len;
/* Read the data into W and process blocks as they get full */
if (lenW) {
- int left = 64 - lenW;
+ unsigned int left = 64 - lenW;
if (len < left)
left = len;
memcpy(lenW + (char *)ctx->W, data, left);
--
1.6.2.5
next reply other threads:[~2009-08-14 23:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-14 23:25 Pádraig Brady [this message]
2009-08-15 20:02 ` Linus' sha1 is much faster! Bryan Donlan
2009-08-15 20:12 ` John Tapsell
2009-08-15 20:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-08-15 20:54 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-08-17 1:55 ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-08-26 11:39 ` Pádraig Brady
2017-04-20 21:35 ` galt
2017-04-20 21:38 ` galt
2009-08-17 8:22 ` Andreas Ericsson
2009-08-16 0:06 ` Theodore Tso
2009-08-16 19:25 ` Giuseppe Scrivano
2009-08-16 20:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-08-16 22:15 ` Giuseppe Scrivano
2009-08-16 22:47 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-08-17 1:53 ` Pádraig Brady
2009-08-17 10:51 ` Giuseppe Scrivano
2009-08-17 15:44 ` Steven Noonan
2009-08-17 16:22 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-08-17 21:43 ` Steven Noonan
2009-08-17 17:32 ` Giuseppe Scrivano
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-08-17 7:23 George Spelvin
2009-08-17 14:20 ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-08-17 17:06 ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-08-17 17:20 ` Paolo Bonzini
2009-08-17 18:54 ` George Spelvin
2009-08-17 19:34 ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-08-17 23:12 ` 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=4A85F270.20703@draigBrady.com \
--to=p@draigbrady.com \
--cc=Bug-coreutils@gnu.org \
--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.