git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Artur Skawina <art.08.09@gmail.com>
Cc: Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] block-sha1: improved SHA1 hashing
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 21:16:46 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.01.0908072107170.3288@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A7CC380.3070008@gmail.com>



On Sat, 8 Aug 2009, Artur Skawina wrote:
> 
> i was seeing such large variations depending on the -mtune flags that
> i gave up and now do just -march=i686; that's what i would expect
> for generic x86 binaries.

I think I have found a way to avoid the gcc crazyness.

Lookie here:

	#             TIME[s] SPEED[MB/s]
	rfc3174         5.094       119.8
	rfc3174         5.098       119.7
	linus           1.462       417.5
	linusas         2.008         304
	linusas2        1.878         325
	mozilla         5.566       109.6
	mozillaas       5.866       104.1
	openssl         1.609       379.3
	spelvin         1.675       364.5
	spelvina        1.601       381.3
	nettle          1.591       383.6

notice? I outperform all the hand-tuned asm on 32-bit too. By quite a 
margin, in fact.

Now, I didn't try a P4, and it's possible that it won't do that there, but 
the 32-bit code generation sure looks impressive on my Nehalem box. The 
magic? I force the stores to the 512-bit hash bucket to be done in order. 
That seems to help a lot.

The diff is trivial (on top of the "rename registers with cpp" patch), as 
appended. And it does seem to fix the P4 issues too, although I can 
obviously (once again) only test Prescott, and only in 64-bit mode:

	#             TIME[s] SPEED[MB/s]
	rfc3174         1.662       36.73
	rfc3174          1.64       37.22
	linus          0.2523       241.9
	linusas        0.4367       139.8
	linusas2       0.4487         136
	mozilla        0.9704        62.9
	mozillaas      0.9399       64.94

that's some really impressive improvement. All from just saying "do the 
stores in the order I told you to, dammit!" to the compiler.

		Linus

---
 block-sha1/sha1.c |    3 ++-
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/block-sha1/sha1.c b/block-sha1/sha1.c
index 19dc41d..f70e1ba 100644
--- a/block-sha1/sha1.c
+++ b/block-sha1/sha1.c
@@ -93,6 +93,7 @@ void blk_SHA1_Final(unsigned char hashout[20], blk_SHA_CTX *ctx)
 
 /* This "rolls" over the 512-bit array */
 #define W(x) (array[(x)&15])
+#define setW(x, val) (*(volatile unsigned int *)&W(x) = (val))
 
 /*
  * Where do we get the source from? The first 16 iterations get it from
@@ -102,7 +103,7 @@ void blk_SHA1_Final(unsigned char hashout[20], blk_SHA_CTX *ctx)
 #define SHA_MIX(t) SHA_ROL(W(t+13) ^ W(t+8) ^ W(t+2) ^ W(t), 1)
 
 #define SHA_ROUND(t, input, fn, constant, A, B, C, D, E) do { \
-	unsigned int TEMP = input(t); W(t) = TEMP; \
+	unsigned int TEMP = input(t); setW(t, TEMP); \
 	E += TEMP + SHA_ROL(A,5) + (fn) + (constant); \
 	B = SHA_ROR(B, 2); } while (0)
 

  parent reply	other threads:[~2009-08-08  4:17 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
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 [this message]
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=alpine.LFD.2.01.0908072107170.3288@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=art.08.09@gmail.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.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).