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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).