Evaluating efforts for turning on run-time detection for algorithms #1481
Replies: 3 comments 3 replies
-
Thanks for using
That is correct -- but could you please specify which options you're particularly concerned with/use?
There is a slow-down due to the runtime detection facility (#624), yes, but I do not understand what you mean by "using the sub optimal implementations of the algorithms": The facility should use the best available implementation. Can you explain? And maybe also quantify how much slowdown you see -- and under which conditions?
Again: Which features are you referring-to?
I do not understand this sentence -- could you please reformulate? In general, though, any help improving performance --while retaining portability-- is greatly welcome. We surely can re-open #624 any time if you have suggestions or even PRs for this. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
So does, e.g. AVX2 flag means that this processor instructions will be built but not used if runtime detection shows their absence? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Sorry about the fumbling in my question. I got all the answers to my questions through this Thank you for the quick response! |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
We know, liboqs provides various compile-time options for the algorithms it implements.
Compile-time detection of platform capabilities gives significant slow-down because of using the sub optimal implementations of the algorithms. OpenSSL uses runtime detection of platform capabilities that ensures better performance.
Could you kindly help me in investigating the options and evaluate efforts for turning it in run-time detection?
Thank you!
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions