On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 09:30:24AM +0800, Zhu Yi wrote: > On Tue, 2010-03-23 at 19:03 +0800, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote: > > Ah, ok. So only additional cost with "paged Rx" and swcrypto is a > > memcpy, which is theoretically rather small cost compared with doing > > tx/rx cryptography in main cpu. > > > > So, what about turn on swcrypto by default upstream? > > hwcrypto offloads cryptography to the device. It saves host CPU cycles > so it's a good thing to do. Have you did benchmarking ? :-P Question is how swcrypto=1 hurts, does we have any valuable data for that? > The bug #519154 doesn't affect most people > and only for 4965. Don't like logic in that sentence. > #556990 doesn't look like swcrypto related, need to > do more investigation. User reported swcrypto=1 helps with it on 2.6.32. > So I don't think we should use swcrypto=1 by > default in upstream. Users are free to do so in their /etc/modprobe.d > though. I think many users don't know about, and just live whit random crashes from time to time, or switch back to windows :-/ Stanislaw _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel
