From owner-freebsd-stable Tue Feb 25 7:39:10 2003 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 0E17837B401 for ; Tue, 25 Feb 2003 07:39:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from gw.nectar.cc (gw.nectar.cc [208.42.49.153]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D675043F3F for ; Tue, 25 Feb 2003 07:39:07 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from nectar@celabo.org) Received: from madman.celabo.org (madman.celabo.org [10.0.1.111]) by gw.nectar.cc (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CBEE54; Tue, 25 Feb 2003 09:39:07 -0600 (CST) Received: by madman.celabo.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 3CE4278C3E; Tue, 25 Feb 2003 09:39:07 -0600 (CST) Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 09:39:07 -0600 From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" To: Mike Tancsa Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: HEADS UP: OpenSSL 0.9.7 in -STABLE Message-ID: <20030225153907.GC96816@madman.celabo.org> Mail-Followup-To: "Jacques A. Vidrine" , Mike Tancsa , freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG References: <5.2.0.9.0.20030224145408.05edb800@marble.sentex.ca> <20030214223844.GA96059@madman.celabo.org> <5.2.0.9.0.20030224145408.05edb800@marble.sentex.ca> <5.2.0.9.0.20030225102526.05852540@marble.sentex.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20030225102526.05852540@marble.sentex.ca> X-Url: http://www.celabo.org/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i-ja.1 Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, Feb 25, 2003 at 10:30:54AM -0500, Mike Tancsa wrote: > At 07:32 AM 25/02/2003 -0600, Jacques A. Vidrine wrote: > >I believe you also need `device cryptodev', else when your application > >tries to open /dev/crypto it will get ENXIO (use truss or ktrace to > >see if this is what is happening). > > That was it, Thanks! Great! > There is now a VERY noticeable difference in the amount of CPU that sshd > takes. The backup server is a PIII800. When doing a dump from a fast > client, with 3des I was looking at close to 40%-50% of CPU going to sshd on > the server. Now I see about 3%-5%. So how is the total throughput? Is it a win or a lose with the 7951? Cheers, -- Jacques A. Vidrine http://www.celabo.org/ NTT/Verio SME . FreeBSD UNIX . Heimdal Kerberos jvidrine@verio.net . nectar@FreeBSD.org . nectar@kth.se To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message