| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20110310165730.GC20504@alboin.amr.corp.intel.com> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 08:57:30 -0800 From: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com> To: Mario 'BitKoenig' Holbe <Mario.Holbe@...Ilmenau.DE>, dm-crypt@...ut.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Milan Broz <mbroz@...hat.com>, Alasdair G Kergon <agk@...hat.com> Subject: Re: dm-crypt: Performance Regression 2.6.37 -> 2.6.38-rc8 On Tue, Mar 08, 2011 at 05:45:08PM +0100, Mario 'BitKoenig' Holbe wrote: > Hello, > > dm-crypt in 2.6.38 changed to per-CPU workqueues to increase it's > performance by parallelizing encryption to multiple CPUs. > This modification seems to cause (massive) performance drops for > multiple parallel dm-crypt instances... > > I'm running a 4-disk RAID0 on top of 4 independent dm-crypt(aes-xts) > devices on a Core2Quad 3GHz. This setup did overcome the single-CPU > limitation from previous versions and utilized all 4 cores for > encryption. > The throughput of this array drops from 282MB/s sustained read (dd, > single process) with 2.6.37.3 down to 133MB/s with 2.6.38-rc8 (which It will be better with multiple processes running on different CPUs. The new design is really for multiple processes. Do you actually use dd for production or is this just a benchmark? (if yes: newsflash: use a better benchmark) -Andi -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists