-# misaligned data depends on misalignment and is either ~1.8x or
-# ~2.9x. These are approximately same factors as for hardware support,
-# so there is little reason to rely on the latter. It might actually
-# hurt performance in mixture of aligned and misaligned buffers,
-# because a) if you choose to flip 'align' flag on per-buffer basis,
-# then you'd have to reload key context; b) if you choose to set
-# 'align' flag permanently, it limits performance for aligned data
-# to ~1/2. All results were collected on 1.5GHz C7.
+# misaligned data depends on misalignment and is either ~1.8x or 2.9x.
+# These are approximately same factors as for hardware support, so
+# there is little reason to rely on the latter. On the contrary, it
+# might actually hurt performance in mixture of aligned and misaligned
+# buffers, because a) if you choose to flip 'align' flag in control
+# word on per-buffer basis, then you'd have to reload key context,
+# which incurs penalty; b) if you choose to set 'align' flag
+# permanently, it limits performance even for aligned data to ~1/2.
+# All above mentioned results were collected on 1.5GHz C7. Nano on the
+# other hand handles unaligned data more gracefully. Depending on
+# algorithm and how unaligned data is, hardware can be up to 70% more
+# efficient than below software alignment procedures, nor does 'align'
+# flag have affect on aligned performance [if has any meaning at all].
+# Therefore suggestion is to unconditionally set 'align' flag on Nano
+# for optimal performance.