netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] IPsec parallelization

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: <20081202085052.GA30301@gondor.apana.org.au>
Date:	Tue, 2 Dec 2008 16:50:52 +0800
From:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
To:	Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	klassert@...hematik.tu-chemnitz.de
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] IPsec parallelization

On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 09:44:19AM +0100, Steffen Klassert wrote:
>
> > Maybe I'm missing somthing, but all you're doing is paralleising
> > based on xfrm_state objects.  You can already do that trivially
> > in the crypto layer with no network-specific knowledge at all
> > because each xfrm_state allocates its own tfm objects.
> 
> No, it's not just parallelizing based on xfrm_states. We are running
> in parallel even within the same state. That's why I'm getting a 
> bandwith up to 900Mbit/s when sending one tcp stream. Parallelizing
> based on state would not help that much if you are sending just one
> stream.

I understand.  What I meant was maintaining ordering within an
xfrm_state.  Since each xfrm_state has its own tfms, all you have
to do is round-robin within each crypto tfm while maintaining
ordering to achieve the same result.

> > This achieves exactly the same thing as your current patch-set
> > plus:
> > 
> > 1) The uesr no longer has to make a system-wide choice of whether
> > to enable this, instead the control is per-SA through the usual
> > algorithm selection mechanism which means that this no longer
> > conflicts with async crypto;
> > 
> > 2) There is no change to the xfrm code;
> > 
> > 3) The same mechanism can benefit other crypto users such as
> > disk encryption.
> 
> The padata stuff is generic, so it can be used even for disk
> encryption or for anything else that should run in parallel but
> needs a certain order at a given point.

What about the first issue?

Cheers,
-- 
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html