linux-kernel - Re: comparison of the AF_ALG interface with the /dev/crypto

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:	Thu, 1 Sep 2011 16:56:56 +0200
From:	Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos <nmav@...tls.org>
To:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.hengli.com.au>
Cc:	Phil Sutter <phil@....cc>, cryptodev-linux-devel@....org,
	linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: comparison of the AF_ALG interface with the /dev/crypto

On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 4:14 PM, Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.hengli.com.au> wrote:

> Are you maxing out your submission CPU? If not then you're testing
> the latency of the interface, as opposed to the throughput.

I think it is obvious that a benchmark of throughput measures
throughput. If however, you think that AF_ALG is in disadvantage in
this benchmark, because it is a high latency interface, you're free to
propose and perform another one. I haven't seen anywhere how is this
interface was supposed to be used, nor about its qualities (high
latency, maybe(?) high throughput or so). Thus, I designed this
benchmark with a use-case in mind, i.e., a TLS or DTLS tunnel
executing in a system with such an accelerator. There might be other
benchmarks with other use cases in mind, but I haven't seen any.

regards,
Nikos
--
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/