2011/9/14 Paul Eggert :
> On 09/13/11 15:15, Loïc Le Loarer wrote:
>
>> I'm looking where _STRING_ARCH_unaligned define is defined in gnulib
>> and in which condition it is set to 0.
>
> gnulib never defines it to anything, so any test that looks like this:
>
>
Hi All,
I'm looking where _STRING_ARCH_unaligned define is defined in gnulib
and in which condition it is set to 0. I'd like to be able to test the
sha1 code in a condition where it is set to 0.
Thanks in advance,
Best regards
--
Loïc
Hi Pádraig,
2011/9/13 Pádraig Brady :
> On 09/12/2011 03:49 PM, Loďc Le Loarer wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Here is my latest results and patch. Please find the patches to
>> sha1.c, sha256.c and sh512.c attached and the "time" of the resulting
>> binaries in sha_benchs.log. For all binaries, in 64 and 32
this architecture.
If anyone can test on other systems, it would be good.
Thanks in advance,
Best regards
Loïc
2011/9/12 Loïc Le Loarer :
> Hi,
>
> Here is my latest results and patch. Please find the patches to
> sha1.c, sha256.c and sh512.c attached and the "time" of the r
Hi,
Here is my latest results and patch. Please find the patches to
sha1.c, sha256.c and sh512.c attached and the "time" of the resulting
binaries in sha_benchs.log. For all binaries, in 64 and 32 bits modes
(.m32), I run 3 times the command "\time sha*sum zero1G" where zero1G
is a 10^9 bytes file
Hi Pádraig,
Thank you for your answer.
2011/9/6 Pádraig Brady
> A few general points.
> You essentially used Linus' code (albeit by
> very helpfully isolating the significant differences).
> It might be easier/required to just include it in gnulib?
> There are a few files in gnulib that are not
Hi,
I saw in the todo list for coreutils that improving sha1sum speed was a
target. So I worked a bit on that.
By using the ideas from the sha1.c file from git sources (
http://git.kernel.org/?p=git/git.git;a=tree;f=block-sha1;hb=pu) which is
clearly faster than the one in gnulib, I have been able
