|
Message-ID: <20240919152817.GA7108@openwall.com> Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2024 17:28:17 +0200 From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Better-performing ???25519??? elliptic-curve cryptography Hi Frank, On Sat, Sep 14, 2024 at 12:55:05PM +0200, Frank Dittrich wrote: > I stumbled across this yesterday, it might be interesting for john > development. > > https://blog.fefe.de/?ts=981af8c1 > > Automatic translation into English should do a decent job, at least > Google Chrome did (not perfect, but good enouh). > > The links refer to documents written in English anyway: > > > https://www.amazon.science/blog/better-performing-25519-elliptic-curve-cryptography > > https://github.com/aws/aws-lc > > https://eprint.iacr.org/2022/1303.pdf > > https://iacr.org/submit/files/slides/2024/tches/tches2024/1_11/slides.pdf Thank you! I only skimmed, but I think this refers to optimizations within the typical single input/output APIs. SIMD is used to some extent anyway, but with multiple inputs/outputs much better throughput should be achievable by that means instead. Some of the same optimizations (more algorithm-level than code-level) could be reusable within that model as well, but this would need to be re-evaluated. We do not currently have a multi-input/output host code implementation of anything ECC in our tree. I was considering getting one in while optimizing tezos-opencl almost 3 years ago, when it still performed ECC on host, but I ended up moving ECC to OpenCL instead, which thus achieved the multi-input/output property without explicit SIMD in the source code. We could revisit the explicit SIMD for non-OpenCL formats, but like I say this is mostly orthogonal and far more promising than the micro-optimizations you refer to, yet is unneeded when we use OpenCL. Alexander
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.