From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S268224AbUHFR26 (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Aug 2004 13:28:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S268215AbUHFRST (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Aug 2004 13:18:19 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.224.249]:42680 "EHLO main.gmane.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S268206AbUHFRR0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Aug 2004 13:17:26 -0400 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Ben Pfaff Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re-implemented i586 asm AES (updated) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 10:17:43 -0700 Message-ID: <87ekmkw5hk.fsf@benpfaff.org> References: <2qbyt-1Op-45@gated-at.bofh.it> <2qemF-3Pj-49@gated-at.bofh.it> Reply-To: blp@cs.stanford.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: c-24-6-66-193.client.comcast.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:FeOQekJWDcRPIJp9cdXizFo682A= Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Linus Torvalds writes: > On Fri, 6 Aug 2004, Andi Kleen wrote: >> >> You could use .altinstructions to patch a jump in at runtime >> based on CPU capabilities. Assuming MMX is really faster of course. > > I seriously doubt that the MMX code could be faster. For what it's worth, about a year about I tested both Gladman's MMX and non-MMX code on a Pentium 4. The non-MMX code was consistently significantly faster in every scenario I could come up with. -- I love deadlines. I love the whooshing noise they make as they go by. --Douglas Adams