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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.4 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B44EC2D0A8 for ; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 11:08:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C2DA20725 for ; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 11:08:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=candelatech.com header.i=@candelatech.com header.b="LiB52Xn/" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726419AbgIWLIh (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Sep 2020 07:08:37 -0400 Received: from mail2.candelatech.com ([208.74.158.173]:43380 "EHLO mail3.candelatech.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726332AbgIWLIh (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Sep 2020 07:08:37 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 304 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 07:08:36 EDT Received: from [192.168.254.6] (unknown [50.46.158.169]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail3.candelatech.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8CEF513C2B0; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 04:03:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mail3.candelatech.com 8CEF513C2B0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=candelatech.com; s=default; t=1600859012; bh=qmqNgz560CSBYNGnAzZ2I7gND2SEDOvbMwyR+2oCsiI=; h=Subject:From:To:Cc:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=LiB52Xn/hWgDGYZIe3DGaA/gRWHDFhh3FpNQvrqY6Hn5QEu2s+3qzyqD8J65AWCmC ZL2xlTY9WYXh6r8SuALvM3qplZpcCczM4JFhSvIQTuPozGMdF4gApQfibF608DXnKG sBOyPTMNgfd84dmXcB0TGywGuxHrwatdHBmL6NGw= Subject: Re: [PATCH] crypto: x86/aesni - implement accelerated CBCMAC, CMAC and XCBC shashes From: Ben Greear To: Ard Biesheuvel Cc: Linux Crypto Mailing List , Herbert Xu , Eric Biggers References: <20200802090616.1328-1-ardb@kernel.org> <25776a56-4c6a-3976-f4bc-fa53ba4a1550@candelatech.com> <9c137bbf-2892-df7a-e6fa-8cce417ecd45@candelatech.com> Organization: Candela Technologies Message-ID: <391c30de-4746-940c-6585-d69c27f2f4cb@candelatech.com> Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2020 04:03:31 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-MW Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org On 8/4/20 12:45 PM, Ben Greear wrote: > On 8/4/20 6:08 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >> On Tue, 4 Aug 2020 at 15:01, Ben Greear wrote: >>> >>> On 8/4/20 5:55 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >>>> On Mon, 3 Aug 2020 at 21:11, Ben Greear wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> This helps a bit...now download sw-crypt performance is about 150Mbps, >>>>> but still not as good as with my patch on 5.4 kernel, and fpu is still >>>>> high in perf top: >>>>> >>>>>       13.89%  libc-2.29.so   [.] __memset_sse2_unaligned_erms >>>>>         6.62%  [kernel]       [k] kernel_fpu_begin >>>>>         4.14%  [kernel]       [k] _aesni_enc1 >>>>>         2.06%  [kernel]       [k] __crypto_xor >>>>>         1.95%  [kernel]       [k] copy_user_generic_string >>>>>         1.93%  libjvm.so      [.] SpinPause >>>>>         1.01%  [kernel]       [k] aesni_encrypt >>>>>         0.98%  [kernel]       [k] crypto_ctr_crypt >>>>>         0.93%  [kernel]       [k] udp_sendmsg >>>>>         0.78%  [kernel]       [k] crypto_inc >>>>>         0.74%  [kernel]       [k] __ip_append_data.isra.53 >>>>>         0.65%  [kernel]       [k] aesni_cbc_enc >>>>>         0.64%  [kernel]       [k] __dev_queue_xmit >>>>>         0.62%  [kernel]       [k] ipt_do_table >>>>>         0.62%  [kernel]       [k] igb_xmit_frame_ring >>>>>         0.59%  [kernel]       [k] ip_route_output_key_hash_rcu >>>>>         0.57%  [kernel]       [k] memcpy >>>>>         0.57%  libjvm.so      [.] InstanceKlass::oop_follow_contents >>>>>         0.56%  [kernel]       [k] irq_fpu_usable >>>>>         0.56%  [kernel]       [k] mac_do_update >>>>> >>>>> If you'd like help setting up a test rig and have an ath10k pcie NIC or ath9k pcie NIC, >>>>> then I can help.  Possibly hwsim would also be a good test case, but I have not tried >>>>> that. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I don't think this is likely to be reproducible on other >>>> micro-architectures, so setting up a test rig is unlikely to help. >>>> >>>> I'll send out a v2 which implements a ahash instead of a shash (and >>>> implements some other tweaks) so that kernel_fpu_begin() is only >>>> called twice for each packet on the cbcmac path. >>>> >>>> Do you have any numbers for the old kernel without your patch? This >>>> pathological FPU preserve/restore behavior could be caused be the >>>> optimizations, or by other changes that landed in the meantime, so I >>>> would like to know if kernel_fpu_begin() is as prominent in those >>>> traces as well. >>>> >>> >>> This same patch makes i7 mobile processors able to handle 1Gbps+ software >>> decrypt rates, where without the patch, the rate was badly constrained and CPU >>> load was much higher, so it is definitely noticeable on other processors too. >> >> OK >> >>> The weak processor on the current test rig is convenient because the problem >>> is so noticeable even at slower wifi speeds. >>> >>> We can do some tests on 5.4 with our patch reverted. >>> >> >> The issue with your CCM patch is that it keeps the FPU enabled for the >> entire input, which also means that preemption is disabled, which >> makes the -rt people grumpy. (Of course, it also uses APIs that no >> longer exists, but that should be easy to fix) >> >> Do you happen to have any ballpark figures for the packet sizes and >> the time spent doing encryption? >> > > My tester reports this last patch appears to break wpa-2 entirely, so we > cannot test it as is. Hello, I'm still hoping that I can find some one to help enable this feature again on 5.9-ish kernels. I don't care about preemption being disabled for long-ish times, that is no worse than what I had before, so even if an official in-kernel patch is not possible, I can carry an out-of-tree patch. Thanks, Ben