From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gmazyland@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 jqLmEajQwaEl for <dm-crypt@saout.de>;
 Sun, 16 Dec 2012 19:15:15 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mail-ee0-f50.google.com (mail-ee0-f50.google.com [74.125.83.50])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mail.saout.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS
 for <dm-crypt@saout.de>; Sun, 16 Dec 2012 19:15:14 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-ee0-f50.google.com with SMTP id b45so3015566eek.37
 for <dm-crypt@saout.de>; Sun, 16 Dec 2012 10:15:14 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <50CE0FAE.6030707@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2012 19:15:10 +0100
From: Milan Broz <gmazyland@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <jvtt3d$1lm$1@dough.gmane.org> <5022883B.8070909@gmail.com>
 <50CDBA37.1050308@interlinx.bc.ca>
In-Reply-To: <50CDBA37.1050308@interlinx.bc.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [dm-crypt] dm-crypt multithreaded yet?
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: "Brian J. Murrell" <brian@interlinx.bc.ca>
Cc: dm-crypt@saout.de

On 12/16/2012 01:10 PM, Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> On 12-08-08 11:39 AM, Milan Broz wrote:
>>
>> Anyway, I have patches rebased for 3.5/3.6-rc here
>> http://mbroz.fedorapeople.org/dm-crypt/
> 
> Unfortunately the files in http://mbroz.fedorapeople.org/dm-crypt/3.6-rc
> all return 403 trying to fetch them.

No idea why it turned world non-readable, fixed.
 
>> If you can test it and prove it helps for your use case, its would
>> be nice. Just take it as experimental, there can be bugs still.
> 
> I was going to try this on an FC18 kernel.  Are you using these patches
> by any chance?

But I am afraid I did not find any real situation where these patches
really helps (AND not cause problems with different pattern).
See also discussion on dm-devel list, I still think generic
kernel workqueues should be used to provide such parallelization and
we should not duplicate code in dm-crypt...

My suggestion is that using AES-NI extension helps much more with
the current upstream code than anything else (for AES, obviously).

Milan