<div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
1. cprng-aes is painfully slow.<br>
</blockquote></div>
when using the haskell AES implementation yes. with AESNI it fly, and even more when<br>
i'll have time to chunk the generation to bigger blocks (says 128 AES block at a time)</blockquote><div><br></div><div>One data-point -- in "intel-aes" I needed to do bigger blocks to get decent performance.</div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
2. It doesn't use NI instructions (or any C implementation, currently).<br>
</blockquote></div>
The NI instructions support are coming. and there's ton of already existing C implementation<br>
that could just be added.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Oh, neat. Could you share a pointer to some C code (with GCC aes intrinsics?) that can replace what the ASM does in the "intel-aes" package?</div><div>
</div></div>