From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.saout.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.saout.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id y-CimdM2ByIY for ; Fri, 29 Jul 2011 07:20:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from v4.tansi.org (ns.km33513-03.keymachine.de [87.118.94.3]) by mail.saout.de (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Fri, 29 Jul 2011 07:20:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gatewagner.dyndns.org (84-74-166-21.dclient.hispeed.ch [84.74.166.21]) by v4.tansi.org (Postfix) with ESMTPA id E51891404001 for ; Fri, 29 Jul 2011 07:20:19 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2011 07:20:18 +0200 From: Arno Wagner Message-ID: <20110729052018.GA10049@tansi.org> References: <4E309CC0.6010706@gmail.com> <4E31F7C2.4050305@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4E31F7C2.4050305@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [dm-crypt] LUKS & TrueCrypt - Speed Test List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: dm-crypt@saout.de Hi Jorge, you can see that running the test several times gives you some appreciation for the variation in the measurement. Anyways, this is what I would expect, i.e. TrueCrypt having a little bit lower speed due to the userspace interface. Thanks for posting these! Arno On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 07:58:58PM -0400, Jorge F?bregas wrote: > On 07/27/2011 07:18 PM, Jorge F?bregas wrote: > > I decided to perform some tests on my Fedora 14 box. This is not a > > pro benchmark so be warned :) > > Hi everyone, > > I performed the tests again (twice for each test) but this time I > formatted the LUKS partition using: > > cryptsetup luksFormat -c aes-xts-plain -s 256 -h ripemd160 /dev/sdd1 > > ...so that I was more _similar_ to the TrueCrypt setup. Also, between > each test I run: > > echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches > > Here are the new results for the same payload (143 GB of data): > > ### TRUECRYPT #### > > 1st round: > real 105m39.547s > user 28m17.667s > sys 42m25.300s > > > 2nd round: > real 105m40.271s > user 28m21.893s > sys 42m19.672s > > > ### LUKS ### > > 1st round: > real 104m33.901s > user 27m41.362s > sys 41m0.339s > > > 2nd round: > real 104m44.913s > user 27m42.364s > sys 40m57.655s > > > Now as you may see, LUKS is roughly around 1 minute ahead (sytem-time) > compared to TrueCrypt. It appears the change in cipher operation mode > definitely affected the results (thing I should have done on the first > place). > > Cheers and thank your for the feedback! > Jorge > _______________________________________________ > dm-crypt mailing list > dm-crypt@saout.de > http://www.saout.de/mailman/listinfo/dm-crypt > -- Arno Wagner, Dr. sc. techn., Dipl. Inform., CISSP -- Email: arno@wagner.name GnuPG: ID: 1E25338F FP: 0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C 0296 797F 6B50 1E25 338F ---- Cuddly UI's are the manifestation of wishful thinking. -- Dylan Evans If it's in the news, don't worry about it. The very definition of "news" is "something that hardly ever happens." -- Bruce Schneier