On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 9:30 AM, Xiongfeng Wang
<wangxiongfeng2@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I tested the performance of software implemented ciphers before and after
> applying this patchset. The performance didn't change much except for
> slight regression when writting. The detail information is as follows.
>
> The command I used:
> cryptsetup -y -c aes-xts-plain -s 256 --hash sha256 luksFormat /dev/sdd1
> cryptsetup -y -c aes-cbc-essiv:sha256 -s 256 --hash sha256 luksFormat /dev/sdd1
> cryptsetup -y -c aes-cbc-benbi -s 256 --hash sha256 luksFormat /dev/sdd1
>
> cryptsetup luksOpen /dev/sdd1 crypt_fun
> time dd if=/dev/mapper/crypt_fun of=/dev/null bs=1M count=500 iflag=direct
> time dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/mapper/crypt_fun bs=1M count=500 oflag=direct
>
> Performance comparision:
> --------------------------------------------------------
> algorithms | before applying | after applying
> --------------------------------------------------------
> | read | write | read | write
> --------------------------------------------------------
> aes-xts-plain | 145.34 | 145.09 | 145.89 | 144.2
> --------------------------------------------------------
> aes-cbc-essiv | 146.87 | 144.62 | 146.74 | 143.41
> --------------------------------------------------------
> aes-cbc-benbi | 146.03 | 144.74 | 146.77 | 144.46
> --------------------------------------------------------
Do you have any estimate of the expected gains for hardware
implementations?
Would it make sense to try out implementing aes-cbc-essiv
on the ARMv8 crypto extensions? I see that Ard has done
some prior work on aes-ccm in arch/arm64/crypto/aes-ce-ccm-*
that (AFAICT) has a similar goal of avoiding overhead by
combining the usual operations, so maybe the same can
be done here.
Arnd
--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
