Re: Tiny table AES implementation
- From: tomstdenis@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: 21 Apr 2006 21:34:25 -0700
karl malbrain wrote:
Right. On Intel machines loads that are back-to-back to the same bank
stall one cycle. Your aes encryption code loads a dword from TE0 and a
byte from s1 back-to-back.
On x86-64 the s1-4 and t1-4 variables are mapped to registers :-)
The only stack hits are the round counter I think. The rest of the
memory hits are key and sboxes.
We have a linux box running here that I would like to test on. Can you
post your rd_clock version for linux?? Thanks, karl m
As I posted in another thread it's the rdtsc() from LTC [which supports
a variety of platforms btw].
As for a "Linux box" if you wanted one you could have just asked me. I
do happen to have one for just this sort of research sitting around.
^_^ grin. [As I've stated before this offer is open to anyone doing
research within reason].
Tom
.
- References:
- Tiny table AES implementation
- From: karl malbrain
- Re: Tiny table AES implementation
- From: tomstdenis
- Re: Tiny table AES implementation
- From: karl malbrain
- Re: Tiny table AES implementation
- From: tomstdenis
- Re: Tiny table AES implementation
- From: karl malbrain
- Re: Tiny table AES implementation
- From: tomstdenis
- Re: Tiny table AES implementation
- From: karl malbrain
- Re: Tiny table AES implementation
- From: tomstdenis
- Re: Tiny table AES implementation
- From: karl malbrain
- Re: Tiny table AES implementation
- From: tomstdenis
- Re: Tiny table AES implementation
- From: karl malbrain
- Tiny table AES implementation
- Prev by Date: Re: Compression leads to encryption NEW COMPRESSION METHOD!
- Next by Date: Re: Weakness of Feistel ciphers
- Previous by thread: Re: Tiny table AES implementation
- Next by thread: Re: Tiny table AES implementation
- Index(es):