Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 14:53:26 +0200 From: Ivan Klymenko <fidaj@ukr.net> To: "Brandon J. Wandersee" <brandon.wandersee@gmail.com> Cc: RW via freebsd-questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>, Oleg Ginzburg <olevole@olevole.ru> Subject: Re: cryptodev HW (aesni) vs software Message-ID: <20151123145326.63d3203b@nonamehost.local> In-Reply-To: <86lh9qhtuw.fsf@WorkBox.Home> References: <20151120200325.2baade9c@nonamehost.local> <20151120192920.119bbf91@gumby.homeunix.com> <20151122130329.6ea9b9c6@nonamehost.local> <86lh9qhtuw.fsf@WorkBox.Home>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 22 Nov 2015 10:38:47 -0600 Brandon J. Wandersee <brandon.wandersee@gmail.com> wrote: > Ivan Klymenko writes: > > > I hope the problem has now become more visible? > > No. State what you believe the "problem" to be. We need to know how > what actually happened is different from what you expected to happen. > Problem 1 At two loaded modules cryptodev and aesni to encrypt selected slower Problem 2 Without any loaded modules cryptodev and aesni encryption occurs at the same rate as in the loaded module aesni - which suggests that hardware encryption is absolutely not working. Problem 3 In the best case FreeBSD inferior Linux in encryption by as much as 23% at exactly the same hardware an example of such a command: openssl speed -evp aes-128-cbc -elapsed
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20151123145326.63d3203b>