From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.zx2c4.com (lists.zx2c4.com [165.227.139.114]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 598CCC27C77 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2024 09:21:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: by lists.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id a2148953; Mon, 17 Jun 2024 09:21:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wr1-x434.google.com (mail-wr1-x434.google.com [2a00:1450:4864:20::434]) by lists.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTPS id ba5b9e59 (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256:NO) for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2024 09:21:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wr1-x434.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-35f1c209893so4420892f8f.2 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2024 02:21:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1718616078; x=1719220878; darn=lists.zx2c4.com; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id:from :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=X0OCGUA0SSUS+tLo5R0xhtHdxgBO5TW50vvbyK4a5wk=; b=kuSGLfGWthpSjNw9VBzSQsZWe2UuydXNMQmiCBAtVW1RD9DOo27e68kvZ7MxNIM2To Avg5z2hB0bgkQXP//N2HyQ0FZkTNsg+wQ3QmU88lSFYH0jCDpyqnrYcKennIIcstE2GN iwHHrRrGj/KHM+DSwQoVx/fjfh95/aPBQlfVBeXZlByEmx8wqw+mRZiErktDHU5MrXt+ lWm29fvgLUtPUojU7QHOWFbMpoHQJSPEh7iyrufmlYgCMpvldnLb9KC5+ZugHJmCHr7R fAb+snNfdS+g7Mq4SPdwhZgimppi1SQTx2x+/MjQFax4XkpOo4HS9ZpU41VivCjvoag7 OfCA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1718616078; x=1719220878; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=X0OCGUA0SSUS+tLo5R0xhtHdxgBO5TW50vvbyK4a5wk=; b=aZ4gFCo0bvIiy1SbRNR335P0DEwnmoKIHFEf3G6QoMXjxz2KrYymvCbtbtw/CP6ZmC QVGjgAOg4umN9Av5QLwV2whrGum1B09vM+xsZB/ko8/yyU8L0sjx/LTJZ5R0WmprgGul e7G8fKqGpxZwmToA0Eok+P27nXWqSN4P8CrtiiKatiWXnEx0XhwTbzv0a8zadqKPbaJs GX5QRhru6NSMjDnwClsPUxQkAzRSQWOwwD1DZwazuy3DSG8Lon8cP4SMPcES+ACz2xFl vHIx0MstFmfQr4c7KgMHDAYY808uuh8NmMnPJLFfFory5oF0du1czprdHvhxPupQlr/k R2Iw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUsDkdP7iq1Ob529wt6Lr6+gKqh5/b5QIOjDYozMYY3u93/gMAHxmVG6tCuMiBaJz2BYYOmXn4I0Q6Wq9J6w0Gif9GAc208a+vG X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyJrw/46g6UAcTqxsiHMrAlqvHGIEsiW5/YPPWY0fIzXQQ2GX0F 62iouo0koZD/xPZRZV9Ckwlf/uWC7pwhq6LMm3JSi1Dl2yg4NoCh0hp55Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IH8PCKo6xdqx+Otqb7n5hfATDMHRBrHkrT5GoRLF+czmdf7oj49LONVE/0tbFhs1A6VJiX3ag== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:790:b0:360:9526:82a6 with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-36095268335mr3117214f8f.28.1718616077566; Mon, 17 Jun 2024 02:21:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.99] (93-48-172-72.ip258.fastwebnet.it. [93.48.172.72]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-360750f2407sm11572518f8f.72.2024.06.17.02.21.16 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 17 Jun 2024 02:21:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2024 11:21:15 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: Mini PCIE HW accelerator for ChaCha20 To: Max Schulze , WireGuard mailing list References: <78a56a8e-59d2-4948-a761-f1f1b3a6b26a@online.de> <93a15ab0-1cfc-4b39-97fe-64712eafb278@gmail.com> Content-Language: en-GB From: Germano Massullo In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30rc1 Precedence: list List-Id: Development discussion of WireGuard List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: wireguard-bounces@lists.zx2c4.com Sender: "WireGuard" Il 16/06/24 21:00, Max Schulze ha scritto: > Ok then I think you really max out the cpu. I have not heard of any acceleration card. Overall I think it's not too bad. The problem is that is far under my internet connection capabilities (1 Gbit/s upload) > Are you running iperf3 with --bidir? Such flag halves the throughput, I am getting ~280 Mbit/s compared to the previous value I got by using iperf3 -c 10.0.50.1 -P 4 -Z bbr (using the Ryzen as client) > Keep in mind that iperf3 itself uses some cpu. > You could test serving a static file and transfer via http. The iperf3 CPU usage is not so high, it wouldn't change much to use the http transfer