From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <jorge.fabregas@gmail.com>
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 iBTz_d6jilZZ for <dm-crypt@saout.de>;
 Fri, 29 Jul 2011 01:59:03 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mail-gw0-f50.google.com (mail-gw0-f50.google.com [74.125.83.50])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mail.saout.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS
 for <dm-crypt@saout.de>; Fri, 29 Jul 2011 01:59:02 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by gwj16 with SMTP id 16so2949519gwj.37
 for <dm-crypt@saout.de>; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 16:59:01 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4E31F7C2.4050305@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 19:58:58 -0400
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_F=E1bregas?= <jorge.fabregas@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <4E309CC0.6010706@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4E309CC0.6010706@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [dm-crypt] LUKS & TrueCrypt - Speed Test
List-Id: <dm-crypt.saout.de>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.saout.de/mailman/options/dm-crypt>,
 <mailto:dm-crypt-request@saout.de?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.saout.de/pipermail/dm-crypt>
List-Post: <mailto:dm-crypt@saout.de>
List-Help: <mailto:dm-crypt-request@saout.de?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.saout.de/mailman/listinfo/dm-crypt>,
 <mailto:dm-crypt-request@saout.de?subject=subscribe>
To: dm-crypt@saout.de

On 07/27/2011 07:18 PM, Jorge F=E1bregas 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