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 xV0WWnIyHZaN for ; Mon, 27 Aug 2012 20:56:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from awesome.dsw2k3.info (awesome.dsw2k3.info [IPv6:2a01:198:661:1f::3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.saout.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Mon, 27 Aug 2012 20:56:54 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2012 20:56:49 +0200 From: Matthias Schniedermeyer Message-ID: <20120827185649.GA12656@citd.de> References: <503B90D7.5060208@redhat.com> <20120827181649.GA8904@citd.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [dm-crypt] Using AES-256 Controller Card List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Brian J. Murrell" Cc: dm-crypt@saout.de On 27.08.2012 14:35, Brian J. Murrell wrote: > On 12-08-27 02:16 PM, Matthias Schniedermeyer wrote: > > > > Contrary to OP: AES-NI > > OP doesn't have AES-NI so it's performance gains are orthogonal. > > > So it's between 1066.52 MiB/s and 1027.7 MiB/s > > Sure, but OP doesn't have AES-NI on his CPU, so I'm not sure the point. Hmm. I reread the original post and i have to say: It's ambiguous. What i read, and what stuck in my head, was "dmcrypt doesn't support AES-NI", not "my CPU doesn't support AES-NI". But i guess the OP meant the latter, so my mistake. Bis denn -- Real Programmers consider "what you see is what you get" to be just as bad a concept in Text Editors as it is in women. No, the Real Programmer wants a "you asked for it, you got it" text editor -- complicated, cryptic, powerful, unforgiving, dangerous.