John Williams wrote: > On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Alex Elsayed <eternal...@gmail.com> wrote: >> hard evidence shows that SHA-1 was equal to or faster than CRC32, which >> is unequivocally simpler and faster than CityHash (though CityHash comes >> close). >> >> And the CPUs in question are *not* particularly rare - Intel since Sandy >> Bridge or so, the majority of SPARC systems, a goodly number of ARM >> systems via coprocessors... > > By the way, your "hard evidence" is imaginary. > > Here you can see that SHA-1 is about 5 cycles per byte on Sandybridge: > > https://blake2.net/ > > While SpookyHash (and CityHash) are about 3 bytes per cycle (on long > keys) which is about 0.33 cycles per byte. More than 10 times faster > than SHA-1. > > http://burtleburtle.net/bob/hash/spooky.html
On further examination, I did indeed make a mistake - the hardware acceleration for SHA on Intel will be in Skylake; only the AES acceleration was added in Sandy Bridge. So you are correct to some degree with the rarity argument. However, performance-wise, that means SHA-1 on Intel is still a software implementation. Let's look at ARMv8. The ARM v8 architecture added a few cryptographic instructions, including for SHA-1. The results: https://github.com/openssl/openssl/blob/master/crypto/sha/asm/sha1-armv8.pl # hardware-assisted software(*) # Apple A7 2.31 4.13 (+14%) # Cortex-A53 2.19 8.73 (+108%) # Cortex-A57 2.35 7.88 (+74%) >From the CityHash readme, on a Xeon X5550 (which is _considerably_ more powerful than any of the above): On a single core of a 2.67GHz Intel Xeon X5550, CityHashCrc256 peaks at about 5 to 5.5 bytes/cycle. The other CityHashCrc functions are wrappers around CityHashCrc256 and should have similar performance on long strings. (CityHashCrc256 in v1.0.3 was even faster, but we decided it wasn't as thorough as it should be.) CityHash128 peaks at about 4.3 bytes/cycle. The fastest Murmur variant on that hardware, Murmur3F, peaks at about 2.4 bytes/cycle. We expect the peak speed of CityHash128 to dominate CityHash64, which is aimed more toward short strings or use in hash tables. So CityHash is - at best - half as fast as SHA1 with acceleration. In fact, on the Apple A7, it would likely be slower than _software_ SHA-1. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
