From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jean-Luc Cooke Subject: Re: [CryptoAPI-devel] Re: [Design] [PATCH] USAGI IPsec Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 10:50:26 -0400 Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Message-ID: <20021024105026.C1170@certainkey.com> References: <3DB41338.3070502@storm.ca> <1035168066.4817.1.camel@rth.ninka.net> <1035185654.21824.11.camel@janus.txd.hvrlab.org> <3DB4DBC8.8647E32E@pp.inet.fi> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Herbert Valerio Riedel , "David S. Miller" , Sandy Harris , Mitsuru KANDA , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com, cryptoapi-devel@kerneli.org, design@lists.freeswan.org, usagi@linux-ipv6.org Return-path: To: Jari Ruusu Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3DB4DBC8.8647E32E@pp.inet.fi>; from jari.ruusu@pp.inet.fi on Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 08:02:00AM +0300 Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 08:02:00AM +0300, Jari Ruusu wrote: > kerneli.org/cryptoapi _is_ useless joke for many needs. Fortunately other > people are able to see the limitations/sillyness of kerneli.org/cryptoapi: > > 1) You are trying to replace link/insmod time overhead with runtime > overhead + unnecessary bloat. > 2) No direct link access to low level cipher functions or higher level > functions. > 3) No clean way to replace cipher code with processor type optimized > assembler implementations. Jari has a few points here. But the "killer" functionalities are all there IMHO. Low-level assembler implementations are over-rated, again IMHO. The performance difference between C and ASM is at most 50%. 1ms vs 1.5 ms. Even if you've got a large payload on the rare occation (>5MB) block ciphers are quite fast for 95% of applications JLC -- http://www.certainkey.com Suite 4560 CTTC 1125 Colonel By Dr. Ottawa ON, K1S 5B6 C: 613.263.2983