Re: [PATCH] crypto: fix FTBFS with ARM SHA1-asm and THUMB2_KERNEL

[Jussi Kivilinna]

Quoting Jussi Kivilinna <jussi.kivilinna@xxxxxxxx>:

> Quoting Matt Sealey <matt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
> > This question is to the implementor/committer (Dave McCullough), how
> > exactly did you measure the benchmark and can we reproduce it on some
> > other ARM box?
> >
> > If it's long and laborious and not so important to test the IPsec
> > tunnel use-case, what would be the simplest possible benchmark to see
> > if the C vs. assembly version is faster for a particular ARM device? I
> > can get hold of pretty much any Cortex-A8 or Cortex-A9 that matters, I
> > have access to a Chromebook for A15, and maybe an i.MX27 or i.MX35 and
> > a couple Marvell boards (ARMv6) if I set my mind to it... that much
> > testing implies we find a pretty concise benchmark though with a
> > fairly common kernel version we can spread around (i.MX, OMAP and the
> > Chromebook, I can handle, the rest I'm a little wary of bothering to
> > spend too much time on). I think that could cover a good swath of
> > not-ARMv5 use cases from lower speeds to quad core monsters.. but I
> > might stick to i.MX to start with..
>
> There is 'tcrypt' module in crypto/ for quick benchmarking.  
> 'modprobe tcrypt mode=500 sec=1' tests AES in various cipher-modes,  
> using different buffer sizes and outputs results to kernel log.

Actually mode=200 might be better, as mode=500 is for asynchronous  
implementations and might use hardware crypto if such device/module is  
available.

-Jussi


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/