memxor

[Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos]

On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos
<n.mavrogiannopoulos at gmail.com> wrote:

Corrected figures for nettle-benchmark. My previous issue seems to
have been because a new ./configure doesn't really undo the previous
settings. SSE is faster than the previous implementations (asm or C),
but ASM performs better than C in the unaligned case. I cannot figure
out why my benchmark shows otherwise (our unaligned test seem to be
pretty much identical). I include the overhead that you subtract, but
seems to be identical in both cases.

* ASM
benchmark call overhead: 0.001862 us   5.46 cycles

         Algorithm        mode Mbyte/s cycles/byte cycles/block
            memxor     aligned 11980.56        0.23         1.87
            memxor   unaligned 11269.30        0.25         1.98

* C implementation:
benchmark call overhead: 0.001875 us   5.49 cycles

         Algorithm        mode Mbyte/s cycles/byte cycles/block
            memxor     aligned 11777.25        0.24         1.90
            memxor   unaligned 7794.15        0.36         2.87

* SSE2
benchmark call overhead: 0.001868 us   5.47 cycles

         Algorithm        mode Mbyte/s cycles/byte cycles/block
            memxor     aligned 15961.09        0.18         1.40
            memxor   unaligned 15882.32        0.18         1.41


regards,
Nikos