Andy Polyakov wrote: | | Another thing to consider in the same line of minimal assumption. | Explicitly "prototype" mnemonics, e.g. not xor %rax,%rax, but xorq | %rax,%rax. Yes, GNU assembler works with "unprototyped" mnemonics, but | Solaris assembler is known to be allergic to them. Well, we haven't seen | Solaris x86_64 assembler yet, but it's plausible to assume that it won't | be any different in this respect from x86.
Thanks for the advice. | Another unwritten rule is don't get fixated on particular | u-architecture, Opteron in this case. Consider other implementations | too, EM64T in this case. Favor *all-round* performance! Actually, I optimize only for the AMD microarch, because I don't have Intel hardware in my hands. | >Ok. So, here is my question to the OpenSSL community: what algorithm | >would you like to see optimized for AMD64 ? AES, SHA-1, Blowfish, RC5 ? | | I might have an opportunity to play with AES some day this year... | Blowfish is perfectly comfortable in tiny IA-32 register bank and | compiler-generated code was observed to be as fast as assembler | implementation on x86. Meaning that it will be even more comfortable in | x86_64 register bank and compiler has all chances to do decent job. | Who uses RC5? A. Okay, so: SHA-1: Dean already worked on this, using SSE2. RSA: The compiler already does a good job with 64-bit arithmetic. Blowfish: Not used as much as AES. RC5: Not very popular. I think I am going to stick with one the algorithm proposed by Steve and Peter: AES. My first step will be to study the only existing AMD64 implementation of AES: loop-aes, merged in Linux kernel 2.6.8-rc3 by Brian Gladman. -- Marc Bevand http://epita.fr/~bevand_m Computer Science School EPITA - System, Network and Security Dept. ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
