Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 11 Feb 2001 12:47:07 -0800
From:      Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>
To:        Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
Cc:        current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: OpenSSL ASM patch
Message-ID:  <20010211124707.S3274@fw.wintelcom.net>
In-Reply-To: <20010211122802.A78975@mollari.cthul.hu>; from kris@obsecurity.org on Sun, Feb 11, 2001 at 12:28:02PM -0800
References:  <20010211094946.A51308@mollari.cthul.hu> <20010211122802.A78975@mollari.cthul.hu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> [010211 12:32] wrote:
> Updated patch now available at the same location. Changes:
> 
> * Document the MACHINE_CPU types which are currently used
> 
> * Make NOPERL mutually exclusive with OpenSSL ASM and document it
> 
> * Teach make(1) about MACHINE_CPU and provide sensible defaults for
>   i386 and alpha.
> 
> http://www.freebsd.org/~kris/openssl-asm.patch
> 

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.

Is it possible to have multiple ASM cores and use the appropriate
routines?  Or must it all be choosen at compile time?

-- 
-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




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010211124707.S3274>