From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Oct 20 21:11:47 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11C2E16A416 for ; Fri, 20 Oct 2006 21:11:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from matthieu.michaud@epita.info) Received: from marge.cload.net (marge.cload.net [88.191.31.8]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF85143D5D for ; Fri, 20 Oct 2006 21:11:43 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from matthieu.michaud@epita.info) Received: (qmail 7241 invoked from network); 20 Oct 2006 21:11:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.2.16?) (192.168.2.16) by 0 with ESMTP; 20 Oct 2006 21:11:43 -0000 Message-ID: <45393B8B.5050506@epita.info> Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 23:11:39 +0200 From: Matthieu Michaud User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (Windows/20060909) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mike Tancsa References: <1160664469.92207.51.camel@moe.cload.net> <200610121537.k9CFbWpw069896@lurza.secnetix.de> <7.0.1.0.0.20061012115832.15edc1b0@sentex.net> In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.0.20061012115832.15edc1b0@sentex.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: VIA C7 support X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 21:11:47 -0000 Mike Tancsa a écrit : > At 11:37 AM 10/12/2006, Oliver Fromme wrote: >> Matthieu Michaud wrote: >> > I rent a small server based on a VIA C7 on which I installed a >> > 6.2-PRERELEASE as of today (see dmesg and kernconf attached). It runs >> > fairly well but I wonder if it couldn't be faster. >> > >> > According to padlock(4) man page, crypto hardware support is available >> > by adding padlock, crypto and cryptodev kernel options. I compiled >> it as >> > modules. I haven't noticed difference between 'openssl speed' and >> > 'openssl speed -engine padlock'. I attached results. >> >> I don't know if the openssl command really uses the padlock >> engine. I doubt it. > > It will if you tell it to, but remember, its only AES that it will speed > up. You wont see a difference in things like 3des etc. > > Just do the tests for aes > > Try something like > > openssl speed -evp aes-256-ecb -engine padlock > vs > openssl speed -evp aes-256-ecb -engine dynamic > > On a CPU: VIA C3 Nehemiah+RNG+AES (796.77-MHz 686-class CPU) > I get > > type 16 bytes 64 bytes 256 bytes 1024 bytes 8192 > bytes > aes-256-ecb 37610.62k 142398.18k 389573.81k 678504.21k > 868056.96k > aes-256-ecb 4923.20k 5143.88k 5222.51k 5256.46k > 5276.31k > > For comparison, here is the same test on a Celeron 2.6 and an AMD 3800 > aes-256-ecb 39727.25k 41359.33k 42596.01k 42919.64k > 42940.31k > aes-256-ecb 27408.65k 32035.54k 32623.81k 32767.08k > 32822.06k ok, now i see a difference. on my C7 running a recent 6.2 : aes-128-ecb 140283.57k 509427.16k 1340639.69k 2158707.04k 2626033.49k aes-128-ecb 16956.08k 17668.87k 17894.31k 17951.39k 17967.98k it might explain scp speedup. thanx for pointing it to me :)