GNU bug report logs - #5962
performance: improving SHA1 using intel SS3 instructions

Message received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org:

Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Apr 2010 07:50:15 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sat Apr 17 03:50:15 2010
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1O32n8-0007fW-TB
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 17 Apr 2010 03:50:15 -0400
Received: from mail.gnu.org ([199.232.76.166] helo=mx10.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <jim@HIDDEN>) id 1O32n7-0007fR-AC
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 17 Apr 2010 03:50:14 -0400
Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]:35300)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps
	(TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <jim@HIDDEN>) id 1O32n4-0000pO-75
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 17 Apr 2010 03:50:10 -0400
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1O32n3-0002Go-Pj
	for bug-coreutils@HIDDEN; Sat, 17 Apr 2010 03:50:09 -0400
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=60117 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1O32ms-0002FD-N9
	for bug-coreutils@HIDDEN; Sat, 17 Apr 2010 03:50:08 -0400
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.0 (2010-01-18) on eggs.gnu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE
	autolearn=unavailable version=3.3.0
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <jim@HIDDEN>) id 1O32mo-0005ws-Rt
	for bug-coreutils@HIDDEN; Sat, 17 Apr 2010 03:49:58 -0400
Received: from smtp4-g21.free.fr ([212.27.42.4]:60504)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <jim@HIDDEN>) id 1O32ml-0005vp-ES
	for bug-coreutils@HIDDEN; Sat, 17 Apr 2010 03:49:52 -0400
Received: from smtp4-g21.free.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by smtp4-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id F32674C8118
	for <bug-coreutils@HIDDEN>; Sat, 17 Apr 2010 09:49:47 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mx.meyering.net (mx.meyering.net [82.230.74.64])
	by smtp4-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21C1F4C813F
	for <bug-coreutils@HIDDEN>; Sat, 17 Apr 2010 09:49:45 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by rho.meyering.net (Acme Bit-Twister, from userid 1000)
	id 027EED9D; Sat, 17 Apr 2010 09:49:45 +0200 (CEST)
From: Jim Meyering <jim@HIDDEN>
To: Arnold Robbins <arnold@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: improving SHA1 using intel SS3 instructions
In-Reply-To: <3932E3E7D9C8CB428D4E4FC3887B6CEF09ED1EA9CC@HIDDEN>
	(Aharon Robbins's message of "Thu, 15 Apr 2010 11:46:28 +0300")
References: <3932E3E7D9C8CB428D4E4FC3887B6CEF09ED1EA9CC@HIDDEN>
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2010 09:49:44 +0200
Message-ID: <874ojamsbr.fsf@HIDDEN>
Lines: 8
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3)
X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6,
	seldom 2.4 (older, 4)
X-Spam-Score: -5.1 (-----)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit
Cc: bug-coreutils@HIDDEN
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
	<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://debbugs.gnu.org/pipermail/debbugs-submit>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
	<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Spam-Score: -5.1 (-----)

Robbins, Aharon wrote:
> http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/improving-the-performance-of-the-secure-hash-algorithm-1/?cid=sw:dslnews5149

Thanks for the link.
Improving the performance of coreutils' SHA* programs has been
discussed off and on for some time.  Notably, openssl's equivalents
outperform those in coreutils, but portability counts, too,
which means integrating an assembly-based solution takes time.