[hybi] Performance of Vector XOR
"Bob Gezelter" <gezelter@rlgsc.com> Wed, 07 September 2011 20:29 UTC
Return-Path: <gezelter@rlgsc.com>
X-Original-To: hybi@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hybi@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F7EF21F8CAE for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 13:29:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.619
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.619 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.880, BAYES_20=-0.74]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1sus7kyOSF5d for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 13:29:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpoutwbe09.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net (smtpoutwbe09.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net [208.109.78.21]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 68AC621F85D1 for <HYBI@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 13:29:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 24095 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2011 20:31:29 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO localhost) (72.167.218.132) by smtpoutwbe09.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net with SMTP; 7 Sep 2011 20:31:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 17413 invoked by uid 99); 7 Sep 2011 20:31:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
X-Originating-IP: 141.157.213.69
User-Agent: Web-Based Email 5.5.18
Message-Id: <20110907133128.ef1fc80126c74c6c202a919c41c7bb0b.a42c8f016b.wbe@email03.secureserver.net>
From: Bob Gezelter <gezelter@rlgsc.com>
To: len.holgate@gmail.com, Tobias Oberstein <tobias.oberstein@tavendo.de>, rbarnes@bbn.com
Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2011 13:31:28 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0
Cc: HYBI@ietf.org
Subject: [hybi] Performance of Vector XOR
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Server-Initiated HTTP <hybi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hybi>
List-Post: <mailto:hybi@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2011 20:29:47 -0000
Len, Tobias, Richard, I would recommend extreme caution on using rough JavaScript or even Python benchmarks as a test for the execution efficiency of the masking operation (Note: I say this as one who is unconvinced of the benefits of masking). A well-written, straight vector XOR of a message should not be an extremely expensive operation. I would be loath to believe that modern processors cannot effectively perform this operation. With all due respect to the implementers, it is far more likely that the JavaScript (and quite possibly Python) use data structures and representations that were not designed for this type of vector operation. In a real situation, the XOR would be done in code that is likely written in C/C++ or a similar language. If there is a real concern on this issue, then the analysis should be done at the level of precisely what machine instructions are actually being executed. As a former code generator writer, I can attest that it is quite easy to gain or lose efficiency at this level (for example, I would be unsurprised to discover that JavaScript and Python are doing the XOR one byte at a time, rather than in 64-bit chunks; that alone would account for nearly an order of magnitude performance hit). - Bob Gezelter, http://www.rlgsc.com
- [hybi] Performance of Vector XOR Bob Gezelter
- Re: [hybi] Performance of Vector XOR Len Holgate
- Re: [hybi] Performance of Vector XOR Tobias Oberstein
- Re: [hybi] Performance of Vector XOR Bob Gezelter
- Re: [hybi] Performance of Vector XOR Brian McKelvey
- Re: [hybi] Performance of Vector XOR IƱaki Baz Castillo