From: Marc MERLIN <marc@merlins.org>
To: Yves-Alexis Perez <corsac@debian.org>,
dm-crypt@saout.de, htd@fancy-poultry.org
Subject: Re: [dm-crypt] aes-xts-plain with aes_x86_64 makes my SSD 5x slower than my encrypted HD
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2012 14:55:39 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120722215539.GB12951@merlins.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120722203929.GB3925@merlins.org>
On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 01:39:29PM -0700, Marc MERLIN wrote:
> Result is the same:
> gandalfthegreat:~# hdparm -tT /dev/mapper/ssdcrypt
>
> /dev/mapper/ssdcrypt:
> Timing cached reads: 16614 MB in 2.00 seconds = 8317.50 MB/sec
> Timing buffered disk reads: 68 MB in 3.08 seconds = 22.09 MB/sec
>
> Grumble.
>
> It shouldn't be a hardware problem since I do see 400MB/s before encryption.
Ok, I'm not sure I understand. I mounted /dev/mapper/ssdcrypt (btrfs)
and when going through the filesystem I get much higher speeds than
using dd on the raw block device.
But... when I run
The test below shows that I can access the encrypted SSD 10x faster by talking
to it through a btrfs filesystem than doing a dd read from the device node.
So I suppose I could just ignore the dd device node thing, however not really.
Let's take a directory with some source files inside:
gandalfthegreat:/var/local# find src | wc -l
15261
gandalfthegreat:/var/local# echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches; time du -sh src
514M src
real 0m5.865s
So on an encrypted spinning disk, it takes 6 seconds.
On my SSD in the same machine with the same encryption and the same btrfs filesystem,
I get 5 times slower:
gandalfthegreat:/mnt/btrfs_pool1/var/local# time du -sh src
514M src
real 0m24.937s
Incidently 5x is also the speed difference between my encrypted HD and encrypted SSD
with dd.
Now, why du is 5x slower and dd of a file from the filesystem is 2.5x
faster, I have no idea :-/
See below:
1) drop caches
gandalfthegreat:/mnt/btrfs_pool1/var/local/VirtualBox VMs/w2k_virtual# echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
gandalfthegreat:/mnt/btrfs_pool1/var/local/VirtualBox VMs/w2k_virtual# dd if=w2k-s001.vmdk of=/dev/null
2146631680 bytes (2.1 GB) copied, 8.03898 s, 267 MB/s
-> 267MB/s reading from the file through the encrypted filesystem. That's good.
For comparison
gandalfthegreat:/mnt/mnt2# dd if=w2k-s001.vmdk of=/dev/null
2146631680 bytes (2.1 GB) copied, 4.33393 s, 495 MB/s
-> almost 500MB/s reading through another unencrypted filesystem on the same SSD
gandalfthegreat:/mnt/btrfs_pool1/var/local/VirtualBox VMs/w2k_virtual# dd if=/dev/mapper/ssdcrypt of=/dev/null bs=1M count=1000
1048576000 bytes (1.0 GB) copied, 45.1234 s, 23.2 MB/s
-> 23MB/s reading from the block device that my FS is mounted from. WTF?
gandalfthegreat:/mnt/btrfs_pool1/var/local/VirtualBox VMs/w2k_virtual# echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches; dd if=w2k-s001.vmdk of=test
2146631680 bytes (2.1 GB) copied, 17.9129 s, 120 MB/s
-> 120MB/s copying a file from the SSD to itself. That's not bad.
gandalfthegreat:/mnt/btrfs_pool1/var/local/VirtualBox VMs/w2k_virtual# echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches; dd if=test of=/dev/null
2146631680 bytes (2.1 GB) copied, 8.4907 s, 253 MB/s
-> reading the new copied file still shows 253MB/s, good.
gandalfthegreat:/mnt/btrfs_pool1/var/local/VirtualBox VMs/w2k_virtual# dd if=test of=/dev/null
2146631680 bytes (2.1 GB) copied, 2.11001 s, 1.0 GB/s
-> reading without dropping the cache shows 1GB/s
I'm very lost now, any idea what's going on?
Thanks,
Marc
--
"A mouse is a device used to point at the xterm you want to type in" - A.S.R.
Microsoft is to operating systems ....
.... what McDonalds is to gourmet cooking
Home page: http://marc.merlins.org/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-22 21:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-22 19:07 [dm-crypt] aes-xts-plain with aes_x86_64 makes my SSD 5x slower than my encrypted HD Marc MERLIN
2012-07-22 19:47 ` Yves-Alexis Perez
2012-07-22 20:39 ` Marc MERLIN
2012-07-22 21:47 ` Arno Wagner
2012-07-23 6:07 ` Yves-Alexis Perez
2012-07-23 6:28 ` Marc MERLIN
2012-07-23 8:14 ` Arno Wagner
2012-07-23 10:46 ` Milan Broz
2012-07-23 11:09 ` Yves-Alexis Perez
2012-07-23 11:37 ` Milan Broz
2012-07-23 15:08 ` André Gall
2012-07-23 17:27 ` André Gall
2012-07-24 14:06 ` Heinz Diehl
2012-07-24 14:16 ` Milan Broz
2012-07-23 16:12 ` Marc MERLIN
2012-07-23 16:19 ` Yves-Alexis Perez
2012-07-23 17:54 ` Marc MERLIN
2012-07-23 19:26 ` Yves-Alexis Perez
2012-07-23 17:15 ` Milan Broz
2012-07-23 17:51 ` Marc MERLIN
2012-07-23 21:31 ` Milan Broz
2012-07-24 5:57 ` Marc MERLIN
2012-07-24 6:25 ` Heinz Diehl
2012-07-24 15:02 ` Marc MERLIN
2012-07-24 15:19 ` Milan Broz
2012-07-24 16:09 ` Marc MERLIN
2012-07-24 13:54 ` Milan Broz
[not found] ` <500E9099.8050501@redhat.com>
2012-07-24 14:27 ` Heinz Diehl
2012-07-24 14:58 ` Heinz Diehl
2012-07-24 15:38 ` Marc MERLIN
2012-07-24 16:48 ` Heinz Diehl
2012-07-24 6:11 ` Heinz Diehl
2012-07-22 21:55 ` Marc MERLIN [this message]
2012-07-22 20:22 ` Heinz Diehl
2012-08-12 12:49 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
2012-08-16 7:43 ` Marc MERLIN
[not found] ` <502D1F96.3080905@andregall.de>
2012-08-16 17:57 ` Marc MERLIN
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120722215539.GB12951@merlins.org \
--to=marc@merlins.org \
--cc=corsac@debian.org \
--cc=dm-crypt@saout.de \
--cc=htd@fancy-poultry.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox