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 qvj2XKSGVSwT for ; Tue, 24 Jul 2012 16:06:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.17.9]) by mail.saout.de (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Tue, 24 Jul 2012 16:06:53 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 16:06:49 +0200 From: Heinz Diehl Message-ID: <20120724140649.GA21528@fancy-poultry.org> References: <20120722190757.GB10089@merlins.org> <20120722202213.GA7306@fancy-poultry.org> <20120722190757.GB10089@merlins.org> <1342986452.26887.3.camel@scapa> <20120722203929.GB3925@merlins.org> <20120722214757.GA16793@tansi.org> <20120723062850.GA6931@merlins.org> <20120723081407.GA872@tansi.org> <500D2B8E.3000908@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <500D2B8E.3000908@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [dm-crypt] aes-xts-plain with aes_x86_64 makes my SSD 5x slower than my encrypted HD List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Milan Broz Cc: dm-crypt@saout.de On 23.07.2012, Milan Broz wrote: > I do not like this dmcrypt mode a we tried to fix it. There is a bunch of patches > from Mikulas Patocka which switches parallelization to use all available > cpus (if not limited by paramater). > In my tests it improved performance in some cases but not in all situations > (there were some slow downs which scares me). > (You can see patches here http://people.redhat.com/mpatocka/patches/kernel/dm-crypt-paralelizace/) This is definitely the way to go, in the age of multicore-systems. Some of the patches are already included in linux-3.5, and the rest needs to be rebased on top of it. I'd like to try the whole series on a quadcore testing machine, but I'm not familiar with the code in most of the patches, and only one single wrong merge could lead to wrong conclusions.