lib: Optimizing siphash implementation #18014

elichai · 2020-01-28T17:39:20Z

Hi,
This builds on #18013

Before anything I want to point out that we have 3 SipHash implementations CSipHasher, SipHashUint256, SipHashUint256Extra. this PR touches only the first one(not used in any hashmap AFAIK).

I re-implemented the CSipHasher with performance up to 3X times faster for big strings (BUFFER_SIZE = 1000*1000) and 5%-19% faster for small strings (3 bytes, because a minute of syncing showed me that 3 bytes siphash is something that happens quite often)

Benchmarks against other siphash implementations can be found here: https://gist.github.com/elichai/abdebeeaee7e581bc74c75cb9487b3af (code: https://github.com/elichai/siphash-bench)

My implementation was inspired by the one in Rust's stdlib (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/src/libcore/hash/sip.rs) which rust-bitcoin use in https://github.com/rust-bitcoin/bitcoin_hashes.

Before:

$ ./src/bench/bench_bitcoin -filter="SipHash|SipHash_3b|SipHash_32b"
#Benchmark                                      evals       iterations  total       min         max         median      
SipHash                                         5           700         4.20809     0.0011912   0.00122256  0.00120163  
SipHash_32b                                     5           40000000    4.1793      2.08632e-08 2.0948e-08  2.08949e-08 
SipHash_3b                                      5           40000000    3.18892     1.56861e-08 1.64617e-08 1.5749e-08  
$ ./src/bench/bench_bitcoin -filter="SipHash|SipHash_3b|SipHash_32b"
#Benchmark                                      evals       iterations  total       min         max         median      
SipHash                                         5           700         4.24318     0.00120808  0.00121676  0.00121336  
SipHash_32b                                     5           40000000    4.23684     2.06753e-08 2.16015e-08 2.14555e-08 
SipHash_3b                                      5           40000000    3.15998     1.54582e-08 1.61558e-08 1.58555e-08 
$ ./src/bench/bench_bitcoin -filter="SipHash|SipHash_3b|SipHash_32b"
#Benchmark                                      evals       iterations  total       min         max         median      
SipHash                                         5           700         4.2472      0.0012113   0.00121558  0.00121324  
SipHash_32b                                     5           40000000    4.20925     2.09789e-08 2.11288e-08 2.10327e-08 
SipHash_3b                                      5           40000000    3.10727     1.54352e-08 1.55982e-08 1.55463e-08 
$ ./src/bench/bench_bitcoin -filter="SipHash|SipHash_3b|SipHash_32b"
#Benchmark                                      evals       iterations  total       min         max         median      
SipHash                                         5           700         4.37224     0.00124528  0.00125769  0.0012473   
SipHash_32b                                     5           40000000    4.26011     2.1214e-08  2.134e-08   2.13171e-08 
SipHash_3b                                      5           40000000    3.18842     1.59033e-08 1.59832e-08 1.59432e-08

After:

$ ./src/bench/bench_bitcoin -filter="SipHash|SipHash_3b|SipHash_32b"
#Benchmark                                      evals       iterations  total       min         max         median      
SipHash                                         5           700         1.36254     0.000386656 0.000392219 0.000388635 
SipHash_32b                                     5           40000000    4.31286     2.13773e-08 2.17857e-08 2.16181e-08 
SipHash_3b                                      5           40000000    2.91375     1.44794e-08 1.46495e-08 1.45848e-08 
$ ./src/bench/bench_bitcoin -filter="SipHash|SipHash_3b|SipHash_32b"
#Benchmark                                      evals       iterations  total       min         max         median      
SipHash                                         5           700         1.32683     0.000372232 0.000386258 0.000376842 
SipHash_32b                                     5           40000000    4.15533     2.069e-08   2.08661e-08 2.07693e-08 
SipHash_3b                                      5           40000000    2.77612     1.38154e-08 1.3988e-08  1.38665e-08 
$ ./src/bench/bench_bitcoin -filter="SipHash|SipHash_3b|SipHash_32b"
#Benchmark                                      evals       iterations  total       min         max         median      
SipHash                                         5           700         1.36596     0.00038727  0.000392932 0.000391074 
SipHash_32b                                     5           40000000    4.27694     2.13219e-08 2.14471e-08 2.13672e-08 
SipHash_3b                                      5           40000000    2.75763     1.37529e-08 1.38244e-08 1.37862e-08 
$ ./src/bench/bench_bitcoin -filter="SipHash|SipHash_3b|SipHash_32b"
#Benchmark                                      evals       iterations  total       min         max         median      
SipHash                                         5           700         1.34316     0.000376846 0.000386059 0.000385079 
SipHash_32b                                     5           40000000    4.23368     2.1066e-08  2.14124e-08 2.11283e-08 
SipHash_3b                                      5           40000000    2.81931     1.40299e-08 1.42123e-08 1.40787e-08

Also made the benchmarks print a more readable output(https://gist.github.com/elichai/812c8866a69959404b480d968e080475),
this is limited by up to 47 chars of benchmark name, so as long as we don't add more names like CHACHA20_POLY1305_AEAD_256BYTES_ENCRYPT_DECRYPT and longer then it will be fine.
(it can probably be adjustable but that will require iterating over all the tests before running them to determine the longest cell and I thought the 47 limit is more than reasonable)

elichai · 2020-01-28T20:52:22Z

(the Travis failure isn't related, it's a bug in the s390x machines)

maflcko · 2020-01-29T00:41:11Z

@elichai The issue is upstream, see #18016

DrahtBot · 2020-01-29T00:54:27Z

The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.

Conflicts

Reviewers, this pull request conflicts with the following ones:

#26158 (bench: add "priority level" to the benchmark framework by furszy)

If you consider this pull request important, please also help to review the conflicting pull requests. Ideally, start with the one that should be merged first.

laanwj · 2020-01-29T17:19:21Z

That's a very nice speed improvement!

sipa · 2020-01-29T18:00:23Z

Where do we use variable-length SipHash?

cvengler · 2020-01-29T18:08:25Z

I just tested it and the speed improvement is good. Also the formatting is much prettier now.
Will review the code now

cvengler

This review is more related to the interface rather than the crypto as I don't have much experience to review that.

src/bench/bench.cpp

src/bench/crypto_hash.cpp

src/bench/bench.cpp

elichai · 2020-01-29T20:44:07Z

Where do we use variable-length SipHash?

A quick search shows:

GCSFilter::HashToRange BIP158 Compact block filters (blockfilters.h)
RelayAddress I think as a PRNG (net_processing.h).
ByteVectorHash used as the hash for the std::unordered_set<Element, ByteVectorHash> ElementSet; in blockfilter.h.
CConnman::GetDeterministicRandomizer again some randomizer thing (net.cpp).

EDIT: We could also replace this Write+Finalize with a single invocation and gain a few more percentages (by not storing and checking tail, and improving inlining) but that's kinda lose future usability.

Empact · 2020-01-30T03:02:04Z

nit: You have a few whitespace irregularities - running git-clang-format generates this diff

diff --git a/src/bench/crypto_hash.cpp b/src/bench/crypto_hash.cpp
index 9eeb8da16..037260939 100644
--- a/src/bench/crypto_hash.cpp
+++ b/src/bench/crypto_hash.cpp
@@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ static void SipHash(benchmark::State& state)
 {
     uint64_t hash = 0;
     uint64_t k2 = 0;
-    std::vector<uint8_t> in(BUFFER_SIZE,0);
+    std::vector<uint8_t> in(BUFFER_SIZE, 0);
     while (state.KeepRunning())
         hash = CSipHasher(hash, ++k2).Write(in.data(), in.size()).Finalize();
 }
diff --git a/src/crypto/siphash.cpp b/src/crypto/siphash.cpp
index 0b62de998..cfc04c194 100644
--- a/src/crypto/siphash.cpp
+++ b/src/crypto/siphash.cpp
@@ -2,8 +2,8 @@
 // Distributed under the MIT software license, see the accompanying
 // file COPYING or http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php.
 
-#include <crypto/siphash.h>
 #include <crypto/common.h>
+#include <crypto/siphash.h>
 
 #include <algorithm>
 
@@ -50,7 +50,8 @@ CSipHasher& CSipHasher::Write(uint64_t data)
 
 
 /// Load a uint64_t from 0 to 7 bytes.
-inline uint64_t ReadU64ByLenLE(const unsigned char* data, size_t len) {
+inline uint64_t ReadU64ByLenLE(const unsigned char* data, size_t len)
+{
     assert(len < 8);
     uint64_t out = 0;
     for (size_t i = 0; i < len; ++i) {
@@ -85,7 +86,7 @@ CSipHasher& CSipHasher::Write(const unsigned char* data, size_t size)
 
     auto i = needed;
     while (i < len - left) {
-        uint64_t mi = ReadLE64(data+i);
+        uint64_t mi = ReadLE64(data + i);
         v3 ^= mi;
         SIPROUND;
         SIPROUND;
diff --git a/src/crypto/siphash.h b/src/crypto/siphash.h
index 698f9c310..ddf192e8a 100644
--- a/src/crypto/siphash.h
+++ b/src/crypto/siphash.h
@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ class CSipHasher
 {
 private:
     uint64_t v[4];
-    size_t count; // total amount of bytes inputted.
+    size_t count;  // total amount of bytes inputted.
     uint64_t tail; // bytes that weren't processed yet.
 
 public:

src/bench/crypto_hash.cpp

m2709

.

Github-Pull: bitcoin#18014 Rebased-From: 81e0f144216f5021851c30df349e521b0b43935c

elichai · 2020-02-23T14:21:44Z

I decided to drop commit 2b32471b5b113c0a34e06896842a450dc7168454 because it's more controversial than I thought (there might be software that relies on the current formatting and there's #18011 coming up)

jonatack

Concept ACK

before change of formatting

$ ./src/bench/bench_bitcoin -filter="SipHash|SipHash_3b|SipHash_32b"

# Benchmark, evals, iterations, total, min, max, median
SipHash_32b, 5, 40000000, 6.28913, 3.10429e-08, 3.27799e-08, 3.11495e-08

# Benchmark, evals, iterations, total, min, max, median
SipHash_32b, 5, 40000000, 6.33962, 3.10606e-08, 3.30034e-08, 3.12351e-08

# Benchmark, evals, iterations, total, min, max, median
SipHash_32b, 5, 40000000, 6.55364, 3.12087e-08, 3.75397e-08, 3.16322e-08

after change of formatting and added benchmarks

((HEAD detached at 52aa1f380b))$ ./src/bench/bench_bitcoin -filter="SipHash|SipHash_3b|SipHash_32b"

#Benchmark                                      evals       iterations  total       min         max         median      
SipHash                                         5           700         7.58726     0.00214442  0.00219727  0.00217387  
SipHash_32b                                     5           40000000    6.32856     3.11782e-08 3.25053e-08 3.1465e-08  
SipHash_3b                                      5           40000000    4.3802      2.16468e-08 2.21054e-08 2.19273e-08 

#Benchmark                                      evals       iterations  total       min         max         median      
SipHash                                         5           700         7.82075     0.0021651   0.0024746   0.00218246  
SipHash_32b                                     5           40000000    6.39722     3.12934e-08 3.3359e-08  3.16498e-08 
SipHash_3b                                      5           40000000    4.6185      2.18849e-08 2.52748e-08 2.30488e-08 

#Benchmark                                      evals       iterations  total       min         max         median      
SipHash                                         5           700         8.12191     0.00215675  0.00248114  0.00232176  
SipHash_32b                                     5           40000000    6.33754     3.12737e-08 3.24442e-08 3.16561e-08 
SipHash_3b                                      5           40000000    4.3563      2.13873e-08 2.21485e-08 2.17682e-08

after change of algorithm implementation

(pr/18014)$ ./src/bench/bench_bitcoin -filter="SipHash|SipHash_3b|SipHash_32b"

#Benchmark                                      evals       iterations  total       min         max         median      
SipHash                                         5           700         2.0267      0.000571765 0.000590692 0.000579299 
SipHash_32b                                     5           40000000    6.27794     3.10675e-08 3.209e-08   3.13121e-08 
SipHash_3b                                      5           40000000    4.07212     2.01261e-08 2.06954e-08 2.02564e-08 

#Benchmark                                      evals       iterations  total       min         max         median      
SipHash                                         5           700         2.13875     0.000582848 0.000627614 0.000614234 
SipHash_32b                                     5           40000000    6.27427     3.10577e-08 3.16413e-08 3.13393e-08 
SipHash_3b                                      5           40000000    4.02383     1.9983e-08  2.05697e-08 2.00265e-08 

#Benchmark                                      evals       iterations  total       min         max         median      
SipHash                                         5           700         2.05042     0.000577004 0.00060258  0.000584264 
SipHash_32b                                     5           40000000    6.32065     3.10846e-08 3.25604e-08 3.14578e-08 
SipHash_3b                                      5           40000000    4.03686     1.96887e-08 2.08056e-08 2.02039e-08

Will look at the algorithm.

jonatack · 2020-02-21T16:50:42Z

src/crypto/siphash.h

perhaps sort these entries L::16-18

Why would you want to sort them? This order seems to make sense to me?

Yeah, do you remember the reason you wanted a different order here?

jonatack · 2020-02-23T14:27:23Z

I decided to drop commit 2b32471 because it's more controversial than I thought (there might be software that relies on the current formatting and there's #18011 coming up)

Right, will be easier to review as more focused; it was 2 PRs in one before.

jonatack · 2020-07-06T13:51:46Z

Sorry for the delay @elichai -- I still plan to review this.

elichai · 2020-08-02T12:52:21Z

Updated benchmarks with the new benchmarking library:

Before:

|               ns/op |                op/s |    err% |          ins/op |          cyc/op |    IPC |         bra/op |   miss% |     total | benchmark
|--------------------:|--------------------:|--------:|----------------:|----------------:|-------:|---------------:|--------:|----------:|:----------
|        2,982,785.00 |              335.26 |    0.2% |   23,000,202.00 |    7,146,700.00 |  3.218 |   2,125,014.00 |    0.0% |      0.03 | `SipHash`
|               39.53 |       25,296,689.57 |    0.1% |          237.03 |           94.79 |  2.501 |           3.00 |    0.1% |      0.00 | `SipHash_32b`
|               27.87 |       35,879,242.25 |    0.1% |          239.02 |           66.89 |  3.573 |          17.00 |    0.0% |      0.00 | `SipHash_3b`

After:

$ sudo pyperf system tune
$ ./src/bench/bench_bitcoin -filter="SipHash|SipHash_3b|SipHash_32b"
|               ns/op |                op/s |    err% |          ins/op |          cyc/op |    IPC |         bra/op |   miss% |     total | benchmark
|--------------------:|--------------------:|--------:|----------------:|----------------:|-------:|---------------:|--------:|----------:|:----------
|          676,413.00 |            1,478.39 |    0.1% |    4,250,201.00 |    1,623,300.00 |  2.618 |     125,015.00 |    0.0% |      0.01 | `SipHash`
|               39.49 |       25,324,719.95 |    0.1% |          237.03 |           94.73 |  2.502 |           3.00 |    0.1% |      0.00 | `SipHash_32b`
|               23.75 |       42,108,786.61 |    0.2% |          193.02 |           57.00 |  3.387 |          16.00 |    0.0% |      0.00 | `SipHash_3b`

elichai · 2021-03-19T14:26:36Z

With the benchmarks adjusted to bytes
Before:

|             ns/byte |              byte/s |    err% |        ins/byte |        cyc/byte |    IPC |       bra/byte |   miss% |     total | benchmark
|--------------------:|--------------------:|--------:|----------------:|----------------:|-------:|---------------:|--------:|----------:|:----------
|                1.79 |      559,246,583.00 |    0.2% |           17.00 |            4.29 |  3.967 |           2.13 |    0.0% |      0.02 | `SipHash`
|                1.24 |      806,638,658.38 |    0.1% |            7.44 |            2.98 |  2.497 |           0.09 |    0.2% |      0.00 | `SipHash_32b`
|               12.02 |       83,226,929.77 |    0.3% |           74.01 |           28.84 |  2.566 |           5.67 |    0.0% |      0.00 | `SipHash_3b`

After:

|             ns/byte |              byte/s |    err% |        ins/byte |        cyc/byte |    IPC |       bra/byte |   miss% |     total | benchmark
|--------------------:|--------------------:|--------:|----------------:|----------------:|-------:|---------------:|--------:|----------:|:----------
|                0.69 |    1,452,369,540.91 |    0.4% |            4.25 |            1.63 |  2.610 |           0.13 |    0.0% |      0.01 | `SipHash`
|                1.24 |      804,669,432.11 |    0.1% |            7.44 |            2.98 |  2.493 |           0.09 |    0.1% |      0.00 | `SipHash_32b`
|                9.93 |      100,677,637.95 |    0.1% |           65.67 |           23.86 |  2.752 |           5.33 |    0.0% |      0.00 | `SipHash_3b`

sipa · 2021-03-20T02:48:57Z

utACK 19e28a41168d02dc85356714c889b43d96d834d6

PastaPastaPasta

this PR seems quite dead, but if it gets revived, please do the following

PastaPastaPasta · 2022-02-01T12:36:16Z

src/crypto/siphash.cpp

please convert this to a c++11 functional cast

These are integer casts, so I'm not sure if it's worth doing because it decreases the readability, and not worth asking for re-ACKs

PastaPastaPasta · 2022-02-01T12:36:48Z

src/crypto/siphash.cpp

please use a c++11 functional-cast

same as above

maflcko · 2022-02-01T12:41:38Z

this PR seems quite dead

I wouldn't say it is dead. It compiles and (unit) tests fine on itself and on current master. All it needs is review.

PastaPastaPasta

My comment on aliveness was just that it's been about 11 months since it got a review, not to say that there is anything problematic with the pr. Maybe since I commented some others will be notified and will do a review :)

For what it's worth, I don't see any major issues with the PR, although I did add a few more comments of things that likely should be changed

PastaPastaPasta · 2022-02-01T12:45:31Z

src/crypto/siphash.cpp

This should really be a for loop

i is used later, so this will require for(; i < len - left; i+= 8) which I'm not sure is that better because it can be confusing,but I can change it if you think it improves readability

PastaPastaPasta · 2022-02-01T12:48:08Z

src/crypto/siphash.h

Why would you want to sort them? This order seems to make sense to me?

aureleoules

ACK 19e28a41168d02dc85356714c889b43d96d834d6
I verified that the implementation of CSipHasher::Write matches the one from rust-bitcoin/bitcoin_hashes (https://github.com/rust-bitcoin/bitcoin_hashes/blob/ec356e4933f6ee972dd0a1f836a3297b2e9f3407/src/siphash24.rs#L171-L208)

aureleoules · 2022-10-12T16:46:33Z

src/crypto/siphash.cpp

nit: these should be initialized in the class

diff --git a/src/crypto/siphash.cpp b/src/crypto/siphash.cpp index f78771868..dcf40d309 100644 --- a/src/crypto/siphash.cpp +++ b/src/crypto/siphash.cpp @@ -24,8 +24,6 @@ CSipHasher::CSipHasher(uint64_t k0, uint64_t k1) v[1] = 0x646f72616e646f6dULL ^ k1; v[2] = 0x6c7967656e657261ULL ^ k0; v[3] = 0x7465646279746573ULL ^ k1; - count = 0; - tail = 0; } CSipHasher& CSipHasher::Write(uint64_t data) diff --git a/src/crypto/siphash.h b/src/crypto/siphash.h index 4b630f229..1b62e2e6c 100644 --- a/src/crypto/siphash.h +++ b/src/crypto/siphash.h @@ -14,8 +14,8 @@ class CSipHasher { private: uint64_t v[4]; - uint64_t tail; // bytes that weren't processed yet. - uint8_t count; // total amount of bytes inputted. + uint64_t tail{0}; // bytes that weren't processed yet. + uint8_t count{0}; // total amount of bytes inputted. public: /** Construct a SipHash calculator initialized with 128-bit key (k0, k1) */

aureleoules · 2022-10-12T17:52:41Z

Maybe this needs a rebase for the CI to pass on this PR?

elichai · 2022-10-12T21:08:59Z

Couldn't reproduce the linter complaints locally, so rebased, hopefully that'll fix it

aureleoules

reACK 409c2e3 - rebased since last review (no changes)

achow101 · 2022-10-13T14:38:51Z

@sipa re-review?

DrahtBot · 2022-10-20T17:11:07Z

🐙 This pull request conflicts with the target branch and needs rebase.

_{Want to unsubscribe from rebase notifications on this pull request? Just convert this pull request to a "draft".}

luke-jr · 2022-11-10T20:16:24Z

Semi-ACK: Didn't fully review the code, but this has been part of Knots for over 2 years (0.19.1) and no issues seem to have surfaced.

DrahtBot · 2023-02-08T00:18:35Z

There hasn't been much activity lately and the patch still needs rebase. What is the status here?

Is it still relevant? ➡️ Please solve the conflicts to make it ready for review and to ensure the CI passes.
Is it no longer relevant? ➡️ Please close.
Did the author lose interest or time to work on this? ➡️ Please close it and mark it 'Up for grabs' with the label, so that it can be picked up in the future.

achow101 · 2023-04-25T15:28:01Z

Closing as up for grabs due to lack of activity.

Github-Pull: bitcoin#18014 Rebased-From: 409c2e3

Github-Pull: bitcoin#18014 Rebased-From: 169a439

Github-Pull: bitcoin#18014 Rebased-From: 409c2e3

elichai changed the title ~~Optimizing siphash implementation~~ lib: Optimizing siphash implementation Jan 28, 2020

DrahtBot added the Utils/log/libs label Jan 28, 2020

cvengler reviewed Jan 29, 2020

View reviewed changes

src/bench/bench.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

src/bench/bench.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

src/bench/bench.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

src/bench/crypto_hash.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

src/bench/bench.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Empact reviewed Jan 30, 2020

View reviewed changes

src/bench/crypto_hash.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

elichai force-pushed the 2020-01-siphash branch from cd5f26c to 81e0f14 Compare January 30, 2020 16:46

elichai requested a review from sipa January 30, 2020 16:52

m2709 suggested changes Jan 31, 2020

View reviewed changes

bitcoin deleted a comment from m2709 Jan 31, 2020

luke-jr pushed a commit to bitcoinknots/bitcoin that referenced this pull request Feb 9, 2020

Optimized siphash implementation

5cb3bb6

Github-Pull: bitcoin#18014 Rebased-From: 81e0f144216f5021851c30df349e521b0b43935c

DrahtBot mentioned this pull request Feb 20, 2020

Replace current benchmarking framework with nanobench #18011

Merged

elichai force-pushed the 2020-01-siphash branch from 81e0f14 to de0c7fc Compare February 23, 2020 14:21

jonatack reviewed Feb 23, 2020

View reviewed changes

bitcoin deleted a comment from m2709 Feb 24, 2020

DrahtBot mentioned this pull request Mar 28, 2020

WIP NOMERGE [bench] gitian builds for OP_IF bench #18352

Closed

DrahtBot mentioned this pull request Jun 9, 2020

Add MuHash3072 implementation #19055

Merged

elichai mentioned this pull request Jul 6, 2020

Overhaul transaction request logic #19184

Closed

DrahtBot added the Needs rebase label Jul 30, 2020

elichai force-pushed the 2020-01-siphash branch from de0c7fc to 9ed348d Compare August 2, 2020 12:31

elichai force-pushed the 2020-01-siphash branch from 4431644 to 19e28a4 Compare March 19, 2021 14:26

DrahtBot removed the Needs rebase label Mar 19, 2021

DrahtBot mentioned this pull request Dec 18, 2021

docs: avoid C-style casts; use modern C++ casts #23810

Merged

DrahtBot mentioned this pull request Jan 28, 2022

refactor: only use explicit reinterpret/const casts, not implicit #24185

Closed

PastaPastaPasta reviewed Feb 1, 2022

View reviewed changes

DrahtBot mentioned this pull request Sep 23, 2022

bench: add "priority level" to the benchmark framework #26158

Merged

aureleoules approved these changes Oct 12, 2022

View reviewed changes

elichai added 2 commits October 12, 2022 16:55

Add more benchmarks to siphash

169a439

Optimized siphash implementation

409c2e3

elichai force-pushed the 2020-01-siphash branch from 19e28a4 to 409c2e3 Compare October 12, 2022 21:09

aureleoules approved these changes Oct 12, 2022

View reviewed changes

DrahtBot added the Needs rebase label Oct 20, 2022

achow101 added the Up for grabs label Apr 25, 2023

achow101 closed this Apr 25, 2023

luke-jr pushed a commit to luke-jr/bitcoin that referenced this pull request Jan 29, 2024

Optimized siphash implementation

30e00b9

Github-Pull: bitcoin#18014 Rebased-From: 409c2e3

luke-jr pushed a commit to luke-jr/bitcoin that referenced this pull request Jan 30, 2024

Add more benchmarks to siphash

7145d63

Github-Pull: bitcoin#18014 Rebased-From: 169a439

luke-jr pushed a commit to luke-jr/bitcoin that referenced this pull request Jan 30, 2024

Optimized siphash implementation

3094221

Github-Pull: bitcoin#18014 Rebased-From: 409c2e3

bitcoin locked and limited conversation to collaborators Apr 24, 2024

maflcko removed the Up for grabs label Oct 24, 2025

lib: Optimizing siphash implementation #18014

lib: Optimizing siphash implementation #18014

Uh oh!

Conversation

elichai commented Jan 28, 2020 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

elichai commented Jan 28, 2020

Uh oh!

maflcko commented Jan 29, 2020

Uh oh!

DrahtBot commented Jan 29, 2020 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Conflicts

Uh oh!

laanwj commented Jan 29, 2020

Uh oh!

sipa commented Jan 29, 2020

Uh oh!

cvengler commented Jan 29, 2020

Uh oh!

cvengler left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

elichai commented Jan 29, 2020 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Empact commented Jan 30, 2020

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

m2709 left a comment • edited by fanquake Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

elichai commented Feb 23, 2020

Uh oh!

jonatack left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jonatack commented Feb 23, 2020

Uh oh!

jonatack commented Jul 6, 2020

Uh oh!

elichai commented Aug 2, 2020

Uh oh!

elichai commented Mar 19, 2021 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

sipa commented Mar 20, 2021

Uh oh!

PastaPastaPasta left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

maflcko commented Feb 1, 2022

Uh oh!

PastaPastaPasta left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

elichai commented Jan 28, 2020 •

edited

Loading

DrahtBot commented Jan 29, 2020 •

edited

Loading

elichai commented Jan 29, 2020 •

edited

Loading

m2709 left a comment •

edited by fanquake

Loading

jonatack left a comment •

edited

Loading

elichai commented Mar 19, 2021 •

edited

Loading