On Sun, Mar 24, 2019 at 08:45:28PM +0100, Niels Möller wrote:
> "Yuriy M. Kaminskiy" writes:
>
> I've had another look, trying to understand how it differs.
>
> > Does not use pre-rotated tables (as in AES_SMALL), so reduces d-cache
> > footprint from 4.25K to 1K (enc)/1.25K (dec);
> >
"Yuriy M. Kaminskiy" writes:
I've had another look, trying to understand how it differs.
> Does not use pre-rotated tables (as in AES_SMALL), so reduces d-cache
> footprint from 4.25K to 1K (enc)/1.25K (dec);
> completely unrolled, so increases i-cache footprint
> from 948b to 4416b
On 17.03.2019 11:08, Niels Möller wrote:
> "Yuriy M. Kaminskiy" writes:
>
>> On raspberry pi 3b+ (cortex-a53 @ 1.4GHz):
>> Before:
>> aes128 | nanosecs/byte mebibytes/sec cycles/byte
>> ECB enc | 39.58 ns/B 24.10 MiB/s - c/B
>> ECB dec | 39.57
"Yuriy M. Kaminskiy" writes:
> On raspberry pi 3b+ (cortex-a53 @ 1.4GHz):
> Before:
> aes128 | nanosecs/byte mebibytes/sec cycles/byte
> ECB enc | 39.58 ns/B 24.10 MiB/s - c/B
> ECB dec | 39.57 ns/B 24.10 MiB/s - c/B
> After:
>
On raspberry pi 3b+ (cortex-a53 @ 1.4GHz):
Before:
aes128 | nanosecs/byte mebibytes/sec cycles/byte
ECB enc | 39.58 ns/B 24.10 MiB/s - c/B
ECB dec | 39.57 ns/B 24.10 MiB/s - c/B
After:
ECB enc | 15.24 ns/B 62.57 MiB/s
