From: Giuseppe Scrivano <gscrivano@gnu.org>
To: Steven Noonan <steven@uplinklabs.net>
Cc: "Pádraig Brady" <P@draigbrady.com>,
Bug-coreutils@gnu.org,
"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
"Git Mailing List" <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Linus' sha1 is much faster!
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 19:32:31 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <871vnae47k.fsf@master.homenet> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f488382f0908170844h649126efxb27f87d7b319961b@mail.gmail.com> (Steven Noonan's message of "Mon, 17 Aug 2009 08:44:30 -0700")
Hi,
These are the results I reported (median of 5 plus an additional not
considered first run) on the Steve Reid's SHA1 implementation using the
same flags to the compiler that I used for previous tests.
GCC 4.3.3: real 0m2.627s
GCC 4.4.1: real 0m3.742s
In both cases it showed to be slower than other implementations I have
already tried.
Additional note: as for gnulib SHA1, GCC 4.4.1 produced slower code than
GCC 4.3.3.
Cheers,
Giuseppe
Steven Noonan <steven@uplinklabs.net> writes:
>
> Interesting. I compared Linus' implementation to the public domain one
> by Steve Reid[1], which is used in OpenLDAP and a few other projects.
> Anyone with some experience testing these kinds of things in a
> statistically sound manner want to try it out? In my tests, I got
> this:
>
> (average of 5 runs)
> Linus' sha1: 283MB/s
> Steve Reid's sha1: 305MB/s
>
> - Steven
>
> [1] http://gpl.nas-central.org/SYNOLOGY/x07-series/514_UNTARED/source/openldap-2.3.11/libraries/liblutil/sha1.c
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-17 17:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-14 23:25 Linus' sha1 is much faster! Pádraig Brady
2009-08-15 20:02 ` 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 [this message]
-- 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=871vnae47k.fsf@master.homenet \
--to=gscrivano@gnu.org \
--cc=Bug-coreutils@gnu.org \
--cc=P@draigbrady.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=steven@uplinklabs.net \
--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.