Subject: Re: OpenSSL md5 vs. NetBSD md5
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Thor Lancelot Simon <email@example.com>
Date: 01/25/2004 13:13:48
On Sun, Jan 25, 2004 at 07:07:17PM +0100, Christian Biere wrote:
> can anyone confirm that OpenSSL's md5 uses only about half as much CPU/user
> time as NetBSD's own md5?
It actually really depends which architecture you're on, whether OpenSSL
has asm for that architecture, etc. etc.
Unfortunately, SSLeay/OpenSSL used a *very similar* but still divergent
API for the message-digest functions, compared to everyone else in the
world. So we have them named one way in libc, with one API, and named
another way in libcrypto, with a different API. Merging them would be
nontrivial, but I did set out a few months ago to do so anyway.
Unfortunately, what I discovered during some initial testing was that
the OpenSSL implementations were *not* generally faster than the ones
in libc. In at least one case, the OpenSSL asm implementation was
slightly slower than our libc C implementation. Eventually I threw
up my hands and gave up.