linux-kernel - Re: dm-crypt and huge performance penalty

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <AANLkTimFyorLPWv4px8_7KQRu_L8Ezftdb=0mXAOm76K@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 22 Sep 2010 16:52:17 -0700
From:	Ryan Castellucci <ryan.castellucci@...il.com>
To:	Dmitry Nezhevenko <dion@...ex.net>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: dm-crypt and huge performance penalty

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 3:37 PM, Dmitry Nezhevenko <dion@...ex.net> wrote:
> Firstly I've tried to setup raid5 and then dm-crypt on top of it. After
> discovering issue I've tried just raid5 and confirmed that mdadm itself
> works as expected.
>
> And the last idea is to setup three dm-crypt partitions and then raid5 on
> top of independently encrypted drives.
>
> So here are my results:
>
>           |  mdadm   | mdadm+dm-crypt | 3 x dm-crypt + mdadm |
> Seq. read  | 168 Mb/s | 57 Mb/s        | 119 Mb/s             |
> Seq. write | 80 Mb/s  | 36 Mb/s        | 64.4 Mb/s            |

dm-crypt will only use one core per device, so this is expected
behavior (and I believe an issue that is being worked on). From these
numbers it looks like you have a dual core or dual cpu system?

-- 
Ryan Castellucci http://ryanc.org/
--
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/