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 bKbFkhngxnW5 for ; Tue, 24 Jul 2012 18:48:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.187]) by mail.saout.de (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Tue, 24 Jul 2012 18:48:38 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 18:48:20 +0200 From: Heinz Diehl Message-ID: <20120724164820.GA1585@fancy-poultry.org> References: <20120723081407.GA872@tansi.org> <20120723161242.GB27727@merlins.org> <500D86AC.7090100@redhat.com> <20120723175129.GA15867@merlins.org> <500DC2B0.8060409@redhat.com> <20120724055722.GA15507@merlins.org> <500EA8FE.3010303@redhat.com> <20120724142753.GA21730@fancy-poultry.org> <20120724145817.GC21730@fancy-poultry.org> <20120724153806.GB14273@merlins.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120724153806.GB14273@merlins.org> 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: Marc MERLIN Cc: dm-crypt@saout.de, Milan Broz On 24.07.2012, Marc MERLIN wrote: > So I know it doens't make sense, but apparently it's SSD/machine > sensitive and for me the default of 256 is enough for the block > device, but not enough for a dm-crypt'ed device. I guess this has nothing to do with what kind of drive you have, but the real blocksize of the device. Conventional drives with 512/512 are fine with the default, but advanced format and SSD-drives which run with a 4k blocksize need more..