From owner-freebsd-current Sun Feb 11 13: 2:47 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from fw.wintelcom.net (ns1.wintelcom.net [209.1.153.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1ECA137B491 for ; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 13:02:45 -0800 (PST) Received: (from bright@localhost) by fw.wintelcom.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) id f1BL2hJ03985; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 13:02:43 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 13:02:43 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein To: Kris Kennaway Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: OpenSSL ASM patch Message-ID: <20010211130243.V3274@fw.wintelcom.net> References: <20010211094946.A51308@mollari.cthul.hu> <20010211122802.A78975@mollari.cthul.hu> <20010211124707.S3274@fw.wintelcom.net> <20010211125042.B79375@mollari.cthul.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20010211125042.B79375@mollari.cthul.hu>; from kris@obsecurity.org on Sun, Feb 11, 2001 at 12:50:42PM -0800 Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG * Kris Kennaway [010211 12:52] wrote: > On Sun, Feb 11, 2001 at 12:47:07PM -0800, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > > > Looks awesome, someone complained that Linux was able to maintain > > an order of magnitude more SSL connections than FreeBSD, since you > > say this gives us a 3-5x speed up, I'd really like to see it committed > > and ported to -stable ASAP. > > Yep! Just want to give a few days for people to comment on the > MACHINE_CPU thing. > > > Is it possible to have multiple ASM cores and use the appropriate > > routines? Or must it all be choosen at compile time? > > It's done at compile-time. bah, lame. :( How is the worst asm code vs the best C code again? -- -Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org] "I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk." To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message