From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@gmail.com>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
Cc: "linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org" <linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
"nico@linaro.org" <nico@linaro.org>,
Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/8] crypto: aes - retire table based generic AES
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 09:57:18 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170724165718.GA143373@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKv+Gu8tzQOcehEtTu2nJVXRxxSNe5==-stKKkGjCzmvweNX1Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 07:59:43AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 18 July 2017 at 13:06, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> wrote:
> > The generic AES driver uses 16 lookup tables of 1 KB each, and has
> > encryption and decryption routines that are fully unrolled. Given how
> > the dependencies between this code and other drivers are declared in
> > Kconfig files, this code is always pulled into the core kernel, even
> > if it is usually superseded at runtime by accelerated drivers that
> > exist for many architectures.
> >
> > This leaves us with 25 KB of dead code in the kernel, which is negligible
> > in typical environments, but which is actually a big deal for the IoT
> > domain, where every kilobyte counts.
> >
> > Also, the scalar, table based AES routines that exist for ARM, arm64, i586
> > and x86_64 share the lookup tables with AES generic, and may be invoked
> > occasionally when the time-invariant AES-NI or other special instruction
> > drivers are called in interrupt context, at which time the SIMD register
> > file cannot be used. Pulling 16 KB of code and 9 KB of instructions into
> > the L1s (and evicting what was already there) when a softirq happens to
> > be handled in the context of an interrupt taken from kernel mode (which
> > means no SIMD on x86) is also something that we may like to avoid, by
> > falling back to a much smaller and moderately less performant driver.
> > (Note that arm64 will be updated shortly to supply fallbacks for all
> > SIMD based AES implementations, which will be based on the core routines)
> >
> > For the reasons above, this series refactors the way the various AES
> > implementations are wired up, to allow the generic version in
> > crypto/aes_generic.c to be omitted from the build entirely.
> >
> > Patch #1 removes some bogus 'select CRYPTO_AES' statement.
> >
> > Patch #2 factors out aes-generic's lookup tables, which are shared with
> > arch-specific implementations in arch/x86, arch/arm and arch/arm64.
> >
> > Patch #3 replaces the table based aes-generic.o with a new aes.o based on
> > the fixed time cipher, and uses it to fulfil dependencies on CRYPTO_AES.
> >
> > Patch #4 switches the fallback in the AES-NI code to the new, generic encrypt
> > and decrypt routines so it no longer depends on the x86 scalar code or
> > [transitively] on AES-generic.
> >
> > Patch #5 tweaks the ARM table based code to only use 2 KB + 256 bytes worth
> > of lookup tables instead of 4 KB.
> >
> > Patch #6 does the same for arm64
> >
> > Patch #7 removes the local copy of the AES sboxes from the arm64 NEON driver,
> > and switches to the ones exposed by the new AES core module instead.
> >
> > Patch #8 updates the Kconfig help text to be more descriptive of what they
> > actually control, rather than duplicating AES's wikipedia entry a number of
> > times.
> >
> > v4: - remove aes-generic altogether instead of allow a preference to be set
>
> Actually, after benchmarking the x86_64 asm AES code, I am not so sure
> we should remove AES_GENERIC at all, since it turns out to be faster.
> Interestingly, I found a remark by Eric in the git log stating the
> same, so if we want to cut down on AES variants, we should probably
> start by deleting the x86 code instead.
>
> So please disregard this for now: I will rework the other stuff I have
> so it no longer depends on this, and repost, because it is much more
> important for me that that makes it into v4.14. This can wait for
> v4.15, as far as I am concerned, and I will benchmark a bit more to
> see if we can get rid of the i586 code as well.
>
Yes I did notice that aes-generic was actually faster. Probably the x86_64-asm
implementation should be removed, but it may be worthwhile to try a few
different gcc versions to see how well they compile aes-generic. I expect that
x86_64-asm used to be faster but gcc has gotten smarter. Also x86_64-asm is
only really useful on older CPUs, so ideally it should be benchmarked on an
older CPU.
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-07-24 16:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-07-18 12:06 [PATCH v4 0/8] crypto: aes - retire table based generic AES Ard Biesheuvel
2017-07-18 12:06 ` [PATCH v4 1/8] drivers/crypto/Kconfig: drop bogus CRYPTO_AES dependencies Ard Biesheuvel
2017-07-18 12:06 ` [PATCH v4 2/8] crypto - aes: use dedicated lookup tables for table based asm routines Ard Biesheuvel
2017-07-18 12:06 ` [PATCH v4 3/8] crypto: aes - retire table based generic AES in favor of fixed time driver Ard Biesheuvel
2017-07-18 12:06 ` [PATCH v4 4/8] crypto: x86/aes-ni - switch to generic fallback Ard Biesheuvel
2017-07-18 12:06 ` [PATCH v4 5/8] crypto: arm/aes - avoid expanded lookup tables in the final round Ard Biesheuvel
2017-07-18 12:06 ` [PATCH v4 6/8] crypto: arm64/aes " Ard Biesheuvel
2017-07-18 12:06 ` [PATCH v4 7/8] crypto: arm64/aes-neon - reuse Sboxes from AES core module Ard Biesheuvel
2017-07-18 12:06 ` [PATCH v4 8/8] crypto: aes - add meaningful help text to the various AES drivers Ard Biesheuvel
2017-07-24 6:59 ` [PATCH v4 0/8] crypto: aes - retire table based generic AES Ard Biesheuvel
2017-07-24 16:57 ` Eric Biggers [this message]
2017-07-24 17:03 ` Ard Biesheuvel
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=20170724165718.GA143373@gmail.com \
--to=ebiggers3@gmail.com \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=ebiggers@google.com \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nico@linaro.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