On Tue, 2016-12-20 at 22:28 -0500, George Spelvin wrote: > > I do not see why SipHash, if faster than MD5 and more secure, would be a > > problem. > > Because on 32-bit x86, it's slower. > > Cycles per byte on 1024 bytes of data: > Pentium Core 2 Ivy > 4 Duo Bridge > SipHash-2-4 38.9 8.3 5.8 > HalfSipHash-2-4 12.7 4.5 3.2 > MD5 8.3 5.7 4.7
So definitely not faster. 38 cycles per byte is a problem, considering IPV6 is ramping up. But TCP session establishment on P4 is probably not a big deal. Nobody would expect a P4 to handle gazillions of TCP flows (using a 32bit kernel) What about SHA performance (syncookies) on P4 ? Synfloods are probably the only case we might take care of for 2000-era cpus. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
