From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266428AbTGERHS (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Jul 2003 13:07:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266423AbTGERHS (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Jul 2003 13:07:18 -0400 Received: from air-2.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:49569 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266444AbTGERGv (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Jul 2003 13:06:51 -0400 Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2003 10:20:57 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: Jari Ruusu cc: Christoph Hellwig , Chris Friesen , Andrew Morton , , Andrew Morton , Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH] cryptoloop In-Reply-To: <3F068F49.1883BE0D@pp.inet.fi> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 5 Jul 2003, Jari Ruusu wrote: > > This tests only low level cipher functions aes_encrypt() and aes_decrypt() > from linux-2.5.74/crypto/aes.c with all CryptoAPI overhead removed. In real > use, including CryptoAPI overhead, these numbers should be a little bit > smaller. > > key length 128 bits, encrypt speed 68.5 Mbits/sec ... Note that the issue that started the discussion is somewhat different: the performance impact of having to map the pages with sleeping kmap's because of the old virtual-address-pointer interfaces. That won't even show up on most setups, but it can be rather nasty on big boxes with lots of ram and several CPU's. Do we care? Possibly not, but I think from a design standpoint it would be better to not have the problem. Linus