From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 22 23:04:22 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADC5916A4CE for ; Tue, 22 Jun 2004 23:04:22 +0000 (GMT) Received: from arginine.spc.org (arginine.spc.org [195.206.69.236]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 503CE43D55 for ; Tue, 22 Jun 2004 23:04:22 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bms@spc.org) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by arginine.spc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E74865292; Wed, 23 Jun 2004 00:04:08 +0100 (BST) Received: from arginine.spc.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (arginine.spc.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 72717-02; Wed, 23 Jun 2004 00:04:07 +0100 (BST) Received: from empiric.dek.spc.org (82-147-17-88.dsl.uk.rapidplay.com [82.147.17.88]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by arginine.spc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9654765216; Wed, 23 Jun 2004 00:04:07 +0100 (BST) Received: by empiric.dek.spc.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id B1A91614B; Wed, 23 Jun 2004 00:04:06 +0100 (BST) Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 00:04:06 +0100 From: Bruce M Simpson To: Christian Weisgerber Message-ID: <20040622230406.GJ762@empiric.dek.spc.org> Mail-Followup-To: Christian Weisgerber , freebsd-current@freebsd.org References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Optimized ether_crc32_be() X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 23:04:22 -0000 On Fri, Jun 18, 2004 at 11:37:40PM +0000, Christian Weisgerber wrote: > Taken from kern/49957, here's a table-driven implementation of > ether_crc32_be() to complement the little-endian one. For 6-byte > MAC addresses it's about five times faster than the double loop. > > Comments? This sounds like a good idea. I'd be happy to see this committed (providing, as phk@ suggested, that it is subject to proper regression testing) as it may help to address the GPL contamination thread discussed in May's Core Monthly Report (specifically in sk(4)). Also, the reduction of code duplication can only be a good thing. Regards, BMS