linux-kernel - Re: [dm-devel] DM-CRYPT: Scale to multiple CPUs v3

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 10 Oct 2010 19:48:27 +0100
From:	Alasdair G Kergon <agk@...hat.com>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc:	Milan Broz <mbroz@...hat.com>, Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
	device-mapper development <dm-devel@...hat.com>,
	pedrib@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [dm-devel] DM-CRYPT: Scale to multiple CPUs v3

On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 07:17:36PM +0100, Alasdair G Kergon wrote:
> AFAIK Nested dm-crypt is not extreme for some folk who have routine
> configurations using it.  But if in_interrupt is set how does this code
> work for them now compared to how it worked before?
 
And indeed, even if in_interrupt is not set, is there any performance
impact for this (minority) class of users?

Alasdair

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/