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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 13:27:04 +0100 From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com> To: Gonglei <arei.gonglei@...wei.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, qemu-devel@...gnu.org, virtio-dev@...ts.oasis-open.org, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org Cc: weidong.huang@...wei.com, claudio.fontana@...wei.com, mst@...hat.com, luonengjun@...wei.com, hanweidong@...wei.com, xuquan8@...wei.com, wanzongshun@...wei.com, stefanha@...hat.com, jianjay.zhou@...wei.com, longpeng2@...wei.com, arei.gonglei@...mail.com, davem@...emloft.net, wu.wubin@...wei.com, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 1/1] crypto: add virtio-crypto driver On 12/15/2016 03:03 AM, Gonglei wrote: [...] > + > +static struct crypto_alg virtio_crypto_algs[] = { { > + .cra_name = "cbc(aes)", > + .cra_driver_name = "virtio_crypto_aes_cbc", > + .cra_priority = 501, This is still higher than the hardware-accelerators (like intel aesni or the s390 cpacf functions or the arm hw). aesni and s390/cpacf are supported by the hardware virtualization and available to the guests. I do not see a way how virtio crypto can be faster than that (in the end it might be cpacf/aesni + overhead) instead it will very likely be slower. So we should use a number that is higher than software implementations but lower than the hw ones. Just grepping around, the software ones seem be be around 100 and the hardware ones around 200-400. So why was 150 not enough? Christian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists