linux-kernel - Re: How to track down abysmal performance ata - raid1 - crypto - vg/lv

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]

Message-ID: <15446.1280953986@localhost>
Date:	Wed, 04 Aug 2010 16:33:06 -0400
From:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To:	Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net>
Cc:	Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@...it-management.at>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	linux-raid@...r.kernel.org, xfs@....sgi.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dm-devel@...hat.com
Subject: Re: How to track down abysmal performance ata - raid1 - crypto - vg/lv - xfs

On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 12:25:26 +0200, Dominik Brodowski said:

> The "good" news: it also happens on my notebook, even though it has a
> different setup (no raid, disk -> lv/vg -> crypt). On my notebook, I'm
> more than happy to test out different kernel versions, patches etc.
> 
> /dev/sd*                17.7 MB/s       (100 %)
> /dev/mapper/vg1-*       16.2 MB/s       ( 92 %)
> /dev/mapper/*_crypt      3.1 MB/s       ( 18 %)

Unfortunately, on my laptop with a similar config, I'm seeing this:

# dd if=/dev/sda bs=8k count=1000000 of=/dev/null
1000000+0 records in
1000000+0 records out
8192000000 bytes (8.2 GB) copied, 108.352 s, 75.6 MB/s
# dd if=/dev/sda2 bs=8k count=1000000 of=/dev/null
1000000+0 records in
1000000+0 records out
8192000000 bytes (8.2 GB) copied, 105.105 s, 77.9 MB/s
# dd if=/dev/mapper/vg_blackice-root bs=8k count=100000 of=/dev/null
100000+0 records in
100000+0 records out
819200000 bytes (819 MB) copied, 11.6469 s, 70.3 MB/s

The raw disk, the LUKS-encrypted partition that's got a LVM on it, and a
crypted LVM partition. The last run spikes both CPUs up to about 50%CPU each.
So whatever it is, it's somehow more subtle than that.  Maybe the fact that
in my case, it's disk, crypto, and LVM on the crypted partition, rather than
crypted filesystems on an LVM volume?


Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped