Why is hashlib so faster than other codes for sha256 and how can I get my code close to hashlib performance?












1















Bellow is a code that compares hashlib.sha256() to my sha256_test() function which is written in raw python in terms of hash rate performance.



from time import time_ns as time
import hashlib

def pad512(bytes_):
L = len(bytes_)*8
K = 512 - ((L + 1) % 512)
padding = (1 << K) | L
return bytes_ + padding.to_bytes((K + 1)//8, 'big')

def mpars (M):
chunks =
while M:
chunks.append(M[:64])
M = M[64:]
return chunks

def sha256_transform(H, Kt, W):
a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h = H
# Step 1: Looping
for t in range(0, 64):
T1 = h + g1(e) + Ch(e, f, g) + Kt[t] + W[t]
T2 = (g0(a) + Maj(a, b, c))
h = g
g = f
f = e
e = (d + T1) & 0xffffffff
d = c
c = b
b = a
a = (T1 + T2) & 0xffffffff
# Step 2: Updating Hashes
H[0] = (a + H[0]) & 0xffffffff
H[1] = (b + H[1]) & 0xffffffff
H[2] = (c + H[2]) & 0xffffffff
H[3] = (d + H[3]) & 0xffffffff
H[4] = (e + H[4]) & 0xffffffff
H[5] = (f + H[5]) & 0xffffffff
H[6] = (g + H[6]) & 0xffffffff
H[7] = (h + H[7]) & 0xffffffff
return H

Ch = lambda x, y, z: (z ^ (x & (y ^ z)))
## """The x input chooses if the output is from y or z.
## Ch(x,y,z)=(x∧y)⊕(¬x∧z)"""
Maj = lambda x, y, z: (((x | y) & z) | (x & y))
## """The result is set according to the majority of the 3 inputs.
## Maj(x, y,z) = (x ∧ y) ⊕ (x ∧ z) ⊕ ( y ∧ z)"""

ROTR = lambda x, y: (((x & 0xffffffff) >> (y & 31)) | (x << (32 - (y & 31)))) & 0xffffffff
SHR = lambda x, n: (x & 0xffffffff) >> n

s0 = lambda x: (ROTR(x, 7) ^ ROTR(x, 18) ^ SHR(x, 3))
s1 = lambda x: (ROTR(x, 17) ^ ROTR(x, 19) ^ SHR(x, 10))

g0 = lambda x: (ROTR(x, 2) ^ ROTR(x, 13) ^ ROTR(x, 22))
g1 = lambda x: (ROTR(x, 6) ^ ROTR(x, 11) ^ ROTR(x, 25))

def sha256_test (bytes_):
#Parameters
initHash = [
0x6A09E667, 0xBB67AE85, 0x3C6EF372, 0xA54FF53A,
0x510E527F, 0x9B05688C, 0x1F83D9AB, 0x5BE0CD19,
]
Kt = [
0x428a2f98, 0x71374491, 0xb5c0fbcf, 0xe9b5dba5, 0x3956c25b, 0x59f111f1, 0x923f82a4, 0xab1c5ed5,
0xd807aa98, 0x12835b01, 0x243185be, 0x550c7dc3, 0x72be5d74, 0x80deb1fe, 0x9bdc06a7, 0xc19bf174,
0xe49b69c1, 0xefbe4786, 0x0fc19dc6, 0x240ca1cc, 0x2de92c6f, 0x4a7484aa, 0x5cb0a9dc, 0x76f988da,
0x983e5152, 0xa831c66d, 0xb00327c8, 0xbf597fc7, 0xc6e00bf3, 0xd5a79147, 0x06ca6351, 0x14292967,
0x27b70a85, 0x2e1b2138, 0x4d2c6dfc, 0x53380d13, 0x650a7354, 0x766a0abb, 0x81c2c92e, 0x92722c85,
0xa2bfe8a1, 0xa81a664b, 0xc24b8b70, 0xc76c51a3, 0xd192e819, 0xd6990624, 0xf40e3585, 0x106aa070,
0x19a4c116, 0x1e376c08, 0x2748774c, 0x34b0bcb5, 0x391c0cb3, 0x4ed8aa4a, 0x5b9cca4f, 0x682e6ff3,
0x748f82ee, 0x78a5636f, 0x84c87814, 0x8cc70208, 0x90befffa, 0xa4506ceb, 0xbef9a3f7, 0xc67178f2,
]

padM = pad512(bytes_)
chunks = mpars(padM)
# Preparing Initaial Hashes
H = initHash
# Starting the Main Loop
for chunk in chunks:
W =
# Step 1: Preparing Wt
for t in range(0, 16):
W.append((((((chunk[4*t] << 8) | chunk[4*t+1]) << 8) | chunk[4*t+2]) << 8) | chunk[4*t+3])
for t in range(16, 64):
W.append((s1(W[t-2]) + W[t-7] + s0(W[t-15]) + W[t-16]) & 0xffffffff)
# Step 2: transform the hash
H = sha256_transform(H, Kt, W)
# Step 3: Give Out the digest
Hash = b''
for j in H:
Hash += (j.to_bytes(4, byteorder='big'))

return Hash

if __name__ == "__main__":

k = 10000
M = bytes.fromhex('00000000000000000001d2c45d09a2b4596323f926dcb240838fa3b47717bff6') #block #548867
start = time()
for i in range(0, k):
o1 = sha256_test(sha256_test(M))
end = time()
endtns1 = (end-start)/k
endts1 = endtns1 * 1e-9
print('@sha256_TESTs() Each iteration takes: {} (ns) and {} (sec).'.format(endtns1, endts1))
print('@sha256_TESTs() Calculated Hash power: {} (h/s)'.format(int(2/endts1)))

start = time()
for i in range(0, k):
o2 = hashlib.sha256(hashlib.sha256(M).digest()).digest()
end = time()
endtns2 = (end-start)/k
endts2 = endtns2 * 1e-9
print('@hashlib.sha256() Each iteration takes: {} (ns) and {} (sec).'.format(endtns2, endts2))
print('@hashlib.sha256() Calculated Hash power: {} (Kh/s)'.format(int(2/endts2/1024)))

print('Outputs Match : ', o1 == o2)
print('hashlib is ~{} times faster'.format(int(endtns1/endtns2)))


When calculating the hash rate, is 1 Kilo Hash considered to be 1000 hashes or 1024 hashes?!



If I am correct about calculating the hash rate I conclude that my PC can generate a hash rate of ~900 (h/s) using my own sha256_test() function while hashlib.sha256() outperforms this with ~300 Kh/s.



Firstly, I would like to know the mechanism behind hashlib's outstanding performance. When I read the code in hashlib.py, there isn't much code inside it and I can't understand how the hash values are computed. Is that possible to see the code behind hashlib.sha256()?



Secondly, Is there any possibility to improve my code so that it can get close to a performance of 300 (Kh/s)? I have read about Cython, I am just not sure how much is it capable of improving such an algorithm.



Thirdly, Is that technically possible to be faster than hashlib in python?










share|improve this question





























    1















    Bellow is a code that compares hashlib.sha256() to my sha256_test() function which is written in raw python in terms of hash rate performance.



    from time import time_ns as time
    import hashlib

    def pad512(bytes_):
    L = len(bytes_)*8
    K = 512 - ((L + 1) % 512)
    padding = (1 << K) | L
    return bytes_ + padding.to_bytes((K + 1)//8, 'big')

    def mpars (M):
    chunks =
    while M:
    chunks.append(M[:64])
    M = M[64:]
    return chunks

    def sha256_transform(H, Kt, W):
    a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h = H
    # Step 1: Looping
    for t in range(0, 64):
    T1 = h + g1(e) + Ch(e, f, g) + Kt[t] + W[t]
    T2 = (g0(a) + Maj(a, b, c))
    h = g
    g = f
    f = e
    e = (d + T1) & 0xffffffff
    d = c
    c = b
    b = a
    a = (T1 + T2) & 0xffffffff
    # Step 2: Updating Hashes
    H[0] = (a + H[0]) & 0xffffffff
    H[1] = (b + H[1]) & 0xffffffff
    H[2] = (c + H[2]) & 0xffffffff
    H[3] = (d + H[3]) & 0xffffffff
    H[4] = (e + H[4]) & 0xffffffff
    H[5] = (f + H[5]) & 0xffffffff
    H[6] = (g + H[6]) & 0xffffffff
    H[7] = (h + H[7]) & 0xffffffff
    return H

    Ch = lambda x, y, z: (z ^ (x & (y ^ z)))
    ## """The x input chooses if the output is from y or z.
    ## Ch(x,y,z)=(x∧y)⊕(¬x∧z)"""
    Maj = lambda x, y, z: (((x | y) & z) | (x & y))
    ## """The result is set according to the majority of the 3 inputs.
    ## Maj(x, y,z) = (x ∧ y) ⊕ (x ∧ z) ⊕ ( y ∧ z)"""

    ROTR = lambda x, y: (((x & 0xffffffff) >> (y & 31)) | (x << (32 - (y & 31)))) & 0xffffffff
    SHR = lambda x, n: (x & 0xffffffff) >> n

    s0 = lambda x: (ROTR(x, 7) ^ ROTR(x, 18) ^ SHR(x, 3))
    s1 = lambda x: (ROTR(x, 17) ^ ROTR(x, 19) ^ SHR(x, 10))

    g0 = lambda x: (ROTR(x, 2) ^ ROTR(x, 13) ^ ROTR(x, 22))
    g1 = lambda x: (ROTR(x, 6) ^ ROTR(x, 11) ^ ROTR(x, 25))

    def sha256_test (bytes_):
    #Parameters
    initHash = [
    0x6A09E667, 0xBB67AE85, 0x3C6EF372, 0xA54FF53A,
    0x510E527F, 0x9B05688C, 0x1F83D9AB, 0x5BE0CD19,
    ]
    Kt = [
    0x428a2f98, 0x71374491, 0xb5c0fbcf, 0xe9b5dba5, 0x3956c25b, 0x59f111f1, 0x923f82a4, 0xab1c5ed5,
    0xd807aa98, 0x12835b01, 0x243185be, 0x550c7dc3, 0x72be5d74, 0x80deb1fe, 0x9bdc06a7, 0xc19bf174,
    0xe49b69c1, 0xefbe4786, 0x0fc19dc6, 0x240ca1cc, 0x2de92c6f, 0x4a7484aa, 0x5cb0a9dc, 0x76f988da,
    0x983e5152, 0xa831c66d, 0xb00327c8, 0xbf597fc7, 0xc6e00bf3, 0xd5a79147, 0x06ca6351, 0x14292967,
    0x27b70a85, 0x2e1b2138, 0x4d2c6dfc, 0x53380d13, 0x650a7354, 0x766a0abb, 0x81c2c92e, 0x92722c85,
    0xa2bfe8a1, 0xa81a664b, 0xc24b8b70, 0xc76c51a3, 0xd192e819, 0xd6990624, 0xf40e3585, 0x106aa070,
    0x19a4c116, 0x1e376c08, 0x2748774c, 0x34b0bcb5, 0x391c0cb3, 0x4ed8aa4a, 0x5b9cca4f, 0x682e6ff3,
    0x748f82ee, 0x78a5636f, 0x84c87814, 0x8cc70208, 0x90befffa, 0xa4506ceb, 0xbef9a3f7, 0xc67178f2,
    ]

    padM = pad512(bytes_)
    chunks = mpars(padM)
    # Preparing Initaial Hashes
    H = initHash
    # Starting the Main Loop
    for chunk in chunks:
    W =
    # Step 1: Preparing Wt
    for t in range(0, 16):
    W.append((((((chunk[4*t] << 8) | chunk[4*t+1]) << 8) | chunk[4*t+2]) << 8) | chunk[4*t+3])
    for t in range(16, 64):
    W.append((s1(W[t-2]) + W[t-7] + s0(W[t-15]) + W[t-16]) & 0xffffffff)
    # Step 2: transform the hash
    H = sha256_transform(H, Kt, W)
    # Step 3: Give Out the digest
    Hash = b''
    for j in H:
    Hash += (j.to_bytes(4, byteorder='big'))

    return Hash

    if __name__ == "__main__":

    k = 10000
    M = bytes.fromhex('00000000000000000001d2c45d09a2b4596323f926dcb240838fa3b47717bff6') #block #548867
    start = time()
    for i in range(0, k):
    o1 = sha256_test(sha256_test(M))
    end = time()
    endtns1 = (end-start)/k
    endts1 = endtns1 * 1e-9
    print('@sha256_TESTs() Each iteration takes: {} (ns) and {} (sec).'.format(endtns1, endts1))
    print('@sha256_TESTs() Calculated Hash power: {} (h/s)'.format(int(2/endts1)))

    start = time()
    for i in range(0, k):
    o2 = hashlib.sha256(hashlib.sha256(M).digest()).digest()
    end = time()
    endtns2 = (end-start)/k
    endts2 = endtns2 * 1e-9
    print('@hashlib.sha256() Each iteration takes: {} (ns) and {} (sec).'.format(endtns2, endts2))
    print('@hashlib.sha256() Calculated Hash power: {} (Kh/s)'.format(int(2/endts2/1024)))

    print('Outputs Match : ', o1 == o2)
    print('hashlib is ~{} times faster'.format(int(endtns1/endtns2)))


    When calculating the hash rate, is 1 Kilo Hash considered to be 1000 hashes or 1024 hashes?!



    If I am correct about calculating the hash rate I conclude that my PC can generate a hash rate of ~900 (h/s) using my own sha256_test() function while hashlib.sha256() outperforms this with ~300 Kh/s.



    Firstly, I would like to know the mechanism behind hashlib's outstanding performance. When I read the code in hashlib.py, there isn't much code inside it and I can't understand how the hash values are computed. Is that possible to see the code behind hashlib.sha256()?



    Secondly, Is there any possibility to improve my code so that it can get close to a performance of 300 (Kh/s)? I have read about Cython, I am just not sure how much is it capable of improving such an algorithm.



    Thirdly, Is that technically possible to be faster than hashlib in python?










    share|improve this question



























      1












      1








      1








      Bellow is a code that compares hashlib.sha256() to my sha256_test() function which is written in raw python in terms of hash rate performance.



      from time import time_ns as time
      import hashlib

      def pad512(bytes_):
      L = len(bytes_)*8
      K = 512 - ((L + 1) % 512)
      padding = (1 << K) | L
      return bytes_ + padding.to_bytes((K + 1)//8, 'big')

      def mpars (M):
      chunks =
      while M:
      chunks.append(M[:64])
      M = M[64:]
      return chunks

      def sha256_transform(H, Kt, W):
      a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h = H
      # Step 1: Looping
      for t in range(0, 64):
      T1 = h + g1(e) + Ch(e, f, g) + Kt[t] + W[t]
      T2 = (g0(a) + Maj(a, b, c))
      h = g
      g = f
      f = e
      e = (d + T1) & 0xffffffff
      d = c
      c = b
      b = a
      a = (T1 + T2) & 0xffffffff
      # Step 2: Updating Hashes
      H[0] = (a + H[0]) & 0xffffffff
      H[1] = (b + H[1]) & 0xffffffff
      H[2] = (c + H[2]) & 0xffffffff
      H[3] = (d + H[3]) & 0xffffffff
      H[4] = (e + H[4]) & 0xffffffff
      H[5] = (f + H[5]) & 0xffffffff
      H[6] = (g + H[6]) & 0xffffffff
      H[7] = (h + H[7]) & 0xffffffff
      return H

      Ch = lambda x, y, z: (z ^ (x & (y ^ z)))
      ## """The x input chooses if the output is from y or z.
      ## Ch(x,y,z)=(x∧y)⊕(¬x∧z)"""
      Maj = lambda x, y, z: (((x | y) & z) | (x & y))
      ## """The result is set according to the majority of the 3 inputs.
      ## Maj(x, y,z) = (x ∧ y) ⊕ (x ∧ z) ⊕ ( y ∧ z)"""

      ROTR = lambda x, y: (((x & 0xffffffff) >> (y & 31)) | (x << (32 - (y & 31)))) & 0xffffffff
      SHR = lambda x, n: (x & 0xffffffff) >> n

      s0 = lambda x: (ROTR(x, 7) ^ ROTR(x, 18) ^ SHR(x, 3))
      s1 = lambda x: (ROTR(x, 17) ^ ROTR(x, 19) ^ SHR(x, 10))

      g0 = lambda x: (ROTR(x, 2) ^ ROTR(x, 13) ^ ROTR(x, 22))
      g1 = lambda x: (ROTR(x, 6) ^ ROTR(x, 11) ^ ROTR(x, 25))

      def sha256_test (bytes_):
      #Parameters
      initHash = [
      0x6A09E667, 0xBB67AE85, 0x3C6EF372, 0xA54FF53A,
      0x510E527F, 0x9B05688C, 0x1F83D9AB, 0x5BE0CD19,
      ]
      Kt = [
      0x428a2f98, 0x71374491, 0xb5c0fbcf, 0xe9b5dba5, 0x3956c25b, 0x59f111f1, 0x923f82a4, 0xab1c5ed5,
      0xd807aa98, 0x12835b01, 0x243185be, 0x550c7dc3, 0x72be5d74, 0x80deb1fe, 0x9bdc06a7, 0xc19bf174,
      0xe49b69c1, 0xefbe4786, 0x0fc19dc6, 0x240ca1cc, 0x2de92c6f, 0x4a7484aa, 0x5cb0a9dc, 0x76f988da,
      0x983e5152, 0xa831c66d, 0xb00327c8, 0xbf597fc7, 0xc6e00bf3, 0xd5a79147, 0x06ca6351, 0x14292967,
      0x27b70a85, 0x2e1b2138, 0x4d2c6dfc, 0x53380d13, 0x650a7354, 0x766a0abb, 0x81c2c92e, 0x92722c85,
      0xa2bfe8a1, 0xa81a664b, 0xc24b8b70, 0xc76c51a3, 0xd192e819, 0xd6990624, 0xf40e3585, 0x106aa070,
      0x19a4c116, 0x1e376c08, 0x2748774c, 0x34b0bcb5, 0x391c0cb3, 0x4ed8aa4a, 0x5b9cca4f, 0x682e6ff3,
      0x748f82ee, 0x78a5636f, 0x84c87814, 0x8cc70208, 0x90befffa, 0xa4506ceb, 0xbef9a3f7, 0xc67178f2,
      ]

      padM = pad512(bytes_)
      chunks = mpars(padM)
      # Preparing Initaial Hashes
      H = initHash
      # Starting the Main Loop
      for chunk in chunks:
      W =
      # Step 1: Preparing Wt
      for t in range(0, 16):
      W.append((((((chunk[4*t] << 8) | chunk[4*t+1]) << 8) | chunk[4*t+2]) << 8) | chunk[4*t+3])
      for t in range(16, 64):
      W.append((s1(W[t-2]) + W[t-7] + s0(W[t-15]) + W[t-16]) & 0xffffffff)
      # Step 2: transform the hash
      H = sha256_transform(H, Kt, W)
      # Step 3: Give Out the digest
      Hash = b''
      for j in H:
      Hash += (j.to_bytes(4, byteorder='big'))

      return Hash

      if __name__ == "__main__":

      k = 10000
      M = bytes.fromhex('00000000000000000001d2c45d09a2b4596323f926dcb240838fa3b47717bff6') #block #548867
      start = time()
      for i in range(0, k):
      o1 = sha256_test(sha256_test(M))
      end = time()
      endtns1 = (end-start)/k
      endts1 = endtns1 * 1e-9
      print('@sha256_TESTs() Each iteration takes: {} (ns) and {} (sec).'.format(endtns1, endts1))
      print('@sha256_TESTs() Calculated Hash power: {} (h/s)'.format(int(2/endts1)))

      start = time()
      for i in range(0, k):
      o2 = hashlib.sha256(hashlib.sha256(M).digest()).digest()
      end = time()
      endtns2 = (end-start)/k
      endts2 = endtns2 * 1e-9
      print('@hashlib.sha256() Each iteration takes: {} (ns) and {} (sec).'.format(endtns2, endts2))
      print('@hashlib.sha256() Calculated Hash power: {} (Kh/s)'.format(int(2/endts2/1024)))

      print('Outputs Match : ', o1 == o2)
      print('hashlib is ~{} times faster'.format(int(endtns1/endtns2)))


      When calculating the hash rate, is 1 Kilo Hash considered to be 1000 hashes or 1024 hashes?!



      If I am correct about calculating the hash rate I conclude that my PC can generate a hash rate of ~900 (h/s) using my own sha256_test() function while hashlib.sha256() outperforms this with ~300 Kh/s.



      Firstly, I would like to know the mechanism behind hashlib's outstanding performance. When I read the code in hashlib.py, there isn't much code inside it and I can't understand how the hash values are computed. Is that possible to see the code behind hashlib.sha256()?



      Secondly, Is there any possibility to improve my code so that it can get close to a performance of 300 (Kh/s)? I have read about Cython, I am just not sure how much is it capable of improving such an algorithm.



      Thirdly, Is that technically possible to be faster than hashlib in python?










      share|improve this question
















      Bellow is a code that compares hashlib.sha256() to my sha256_test() function which is written in raw python in terms of hash rate performance.



      from time import time_ns as time
      import hashlib

      def pad512(bytes_):
      L = len(bytes_)*8
      K = 512 - ((L + 1) % 512)
      padding = (1 << K) | L
      return bytes_ + padding.to_bytes((K + 1)//8, 'big')

      def mpars (M):
      chunks =
      while M:
      chunks.append(M[:64])
      M = M[64:]
      return chunks

      def sha256_transform(H, Kt, W):
      a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h = H
      # Step 1: Looping
      for t in range(0, 64):
      T1 = h + g1(e) + Ch(e, f, g) + Kt[t] + W[t]
      T2 = (g0(a) + Maj(a, b, c))
      h = g
      g = f
      f = e
      e = (d + T1) & 0xffffffff
      d = c
      c = b
      b = a
      a = (T1 + T2) & 0xffffffff
      # Step 2: Updating Hashes
      H[0] = (a + H[0]) & 0xffffffff
      H[1] = (b + H[1]) & 0xffffffff
      H[2] = (c + H[2]) & 0xffffffff
      H[3] = (d + H[3]) & 0xffffffff
      H[4] = (e + H[4]) & 0xffffffff
      H[5] = (f + H[5]) & 0xffffffff
      H[6] = (g + H[6]) & 0xffffffff
      H[7] = (h + H[7]) & 0xffffffff
      return H

      Ch = lambda x, y, z: (z ^ (x & (y ^ z)))
      ## """The x input chooses if the output is from y or z.
      ## Ch(x,y,z)=(x∧y)⊕(¬x∧z)"""
      Maj = lambda x, y, z: (((x | y) & z) | (x & y))
      ## """The result is set according to the majority of the 3 inputs.
      ## Maj(x, y,z) = (x ∧ y) ⊕ (x ∧ z) ⊕ ( y ∧ z)"""

      ROTR = lambda x, y: (((x & 0xffffffff) >> (y & 31)) | (x << (32 - (y & 31)))) & 0xffffffff
      SHR = lambda x, n: (x & 0xffffffff) >> n

      s0 = lambda x: (ROTR(x, 7) ^ ROTR(x, 18) ^ SHR(x, 3))
      s1 = lambda x: (ROTR(x, 17) ^ ROTR(x, 19) ^ SHR(x, 10))

      g0 = lambda x: (ROTR(x, 2) ^ ROTR(x, 13) ^ ROTR(x, 22))
      g1 = lambda x: (ROTR(x, 6) ^ ROTR(x, 11) ^ ROTR(x, 25))

      def sha256_test (bytes_):
      #Parameters
      initHash = [
      0x6A09E667, 0xBB67AE85, 0x3C6EF372, 0xA54FF53A,
      0x510E527F, 0x9B05688C, 0x1F83D9AB, 0x5BE0CD19,
      ]
      Kt = [
      0x428a2f98, 0x71374491, 0xb5c0fbcf, 0xe9b5dba5, 0x3956c25b, 0x59f111f1, 0x923f82a4, 0xab1c5ed5,
      0xd807aa98, 0x12835b01, 0x243185be, 0x550c7dc3, 0x72be5d74, 0x80deb1fe, 0x9bdc06a7, 0xc19bf174,
      0xe49b69c1, 0xefbe4786, 0x0fc19dc6, 0x240ca1cc, 0x2de92c6f, 0x4a7484aa, 0x5cb0a9dc, 0x76f988da,
      0x983e5152, 0xa831c66d, 0xb00327c8, 0xbf597fc7, 0xc6e00bf3, 0xd5a79147, 0x06ca6351, 0x14292967,
      0x27b70a85, 0x2e1b2138, 0x4d2c6dfc, 0x53380d13, 0x650a7354, 0x766a0abb, 0x81c2c92e, 0x92722c85,
      0xa2bfe8a1, 0xa81a664b, 0xc24b8b70, 0xc76c51a3, 0xd192e819, 0xd6990624, 0xf40e3585, 0x106aa070,
      0x19a4c116, 0x1e376c08, 0x2748774c, 0x34b0bcb5, 0x391c0cb3, 0x4ed8aa4a, 0x5b9cca4f, 0x682e6ff3,
      0x748f82ee, 0x78a5636f, 0x84c87814, 0x8cc70208, 0x90befffa, 0xa4506ceb, 0xbef9a3f7, 0xc67178f2,
      ]

      padM = pad512(bytes_)
      chunks = mpars(padM)
      # Preparing Initaial Hashes
      H = initHash
      # Starting the Main Loop
      for chunk in chunks:
      W =
      # Step 1: Preparing Wt
      for t in range(0, 16):
      W.append((((((chunk[4*t] << 8) | chunk[4*t+1]) << 8) | chunk[4*t+2]) << 8) | chunk[4*t+3])
      for t in range(16, 64):
      W.append((s1(W[t-2]) + W[t-7] + s0(W[t-15]) + W[t-16]) & 0xffffffff)
      # Step 2: transform the hash
      H = sha256_transform(H, Kt, W)
      # Step 3: Give Out the digest
      Hash = b''
      for j in H:
      Hash += (j.to_bytes(4, byteorder='big'))

      return Hash

      if __name__ == "__main__":

      k = 10000
      M = bytes.fromhex('00000000000000000001d2c45d09a2b4596323f926dcb240838fa3b47717bff6') #block #548867
      start = time()
      for i in range(0, k):
      o1 = sha256_test(sha256_test(M))
      end = time()
      endtns1 = (end-start)/k
      endts1 = endtns1 * 1e-9
      print('@sha256_TESTs() Each iteration takes: {} (ns) and {} (sec).'.format(endtns1, endts1))
      print('@sha256_TESTs() Calculated Hash power: {} (h/s)'.format(int(2/endts1)))

      start = time()
      for i in range(0, k):
      o2 = hashlib.sha256(hashlib.sha256(M).digest()).digest()
      end = time()
      endtns2 = (end-start)/k
      endts2 = endtns2 * 1e-9
      print('@hashlib.sha256() Each iteration takes: {} (ns) and {} (sec).'.format(endtns2, endts2))
      print('@hashlib.sha256() Calculated Hash power: {} (Kh/s)'.format(int(2/endts2/1024)))

      print('Outputs Match : ', o1 == o2)
      print('hashlib is ~{} times faster'.format(int(endtns1/endtns2)))


      When calculating the hash rate, is 1 Kilo Hash considered to be 1000 hashes or 1024 hashes?!



      If I am correct about calculating the hash rate I conclude that my PC can generate a hash rate of ~900 (h/s) using my own sha256_test() function while hashlib.sha256() outperforms this with ~300 Kh/s.



      Firstly, I would like to know the mechanism behind hashlib's outstanding performance. When I read the code in hashlib.py, there isn't much code inside it and I can't understand how the hash values are computed. Is that possible to see the code behind hashlib.sha256()?



      Secondly, Is there any possibility to improve my code so that it can get close to a performance of 300 (Kh/s)? I have read about Cython, I am just not sure how much is it capable of improving such an algorithm.



      Thirdly, Is that technically possible to be faster than hashlib in python?







      python python-3.x hash sha256 hashlib






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited Nov 19 '18 at 12:15







      PouJa

















      asked Nov 19 '18 at 12:10









      PouJaPouJa

      748




      748
























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          0














          Well looking at hashlib.py won't help you too much to be honest, but it may give you a hint. What you have done is pure python code, whereas hashlib relies on a C implementation and that would run in circles around pure python with ease. Namely you need to look at this. So if you want to even get close to these numbers, you'd need to look into cython, C, C++ or Rust.






          share|improve this answer























            Your Answer






            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
            StackExchange.snippets.init();
            });
            });
            }, "code-snippets");

            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "1"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: true,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53374359%2fwhy-is-hashlib-so-faster-than-other-codes-for-sha256-and-how-can-i-get-my-code-c%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            0














            Well looking at hashlib.py won't help you too much to be honest, but it may give you a hint. What you have done is pure python code, whereas hashlib relies on a C implementation and that would run in circles around pure python with ease. Namely you need to look at this. So if you want to even get close to these numbers, you'd need to look into cython, C, C++ or Rust.






            share|improve this answer




























              0














              Well looking at hashlib.py won't help you too much to be honest, but it may give you a hint. What you have done is pure python code, whereas hashlib relies on a C implementation and that would run in circles around pure python with ease. Namely you need to look at this. So if you want to even get close to these numbers, you'd need to look into cython, C, C++ or Rust.






              share|improve this answer


























                0












                0








                0







                Well looking at hashlib.py won't help you too much to be honest, but it may give you a hint. What you have done is pure python code, whereas hashlib relies on a C implementation and that would run in circles around pure python with ease. Namely you need to look at this. So if you want to even get close to these numbers, you'd need to look into cython, C, C++ or Rust.






                share|improve this answer













                Well looking at hashlib.py won't help you too much to be honest, but it may give you a hint. What you have done is pure python code, whereas hashlib relies on a C implementation and that would run in circles around pure python with ease. Namely you need to look at this. So if you want to even get close to these numbers, you'd need to look into cython, C, C++ or Rust.







                share|improve this answer












                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer










                answered Nov 19 '18 at 12:36









                Alex HristovAlex Hristov

                2,5551217




                2,5551217






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53374359%2fwhy-is-hashlib-so-faster-than-other-codes-for-sha256-and-how-can-i-get-my-code-c%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Guess what letter conforming each word

                    Port of Spain

                    Run scheduled task as local user group (not BUILTIN)