Received: by 2002:ac0:a5a7:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id m36-v6csp383525imm; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 04:00:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpcqoq7BgWNiSVgccDaAGrA9/AJvhMVmisF9yiGWLpxidZ5zlQgdDzsD9piGlJzOw+t9Pu50 X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:7592:: with SMTP id j18-v6mr5340733pll.51.1531911636791; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 04:00:36 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1531911636; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=u+ILdHdJ/VhWveCdBer/JC1kSOyiUe9lpjZna06BTltT73HG1yrPVKWAsdd3CONxcn EkkDZPVOF8ChtAiQsiWMtDzFAtUn293aSMLhTZXOP6/3odhWE3gobrnubZMP9f8RQAOO lNO3KGzGU4q8nVAf44GivKfYrEH6SnXuqjQug+REMYwFrprT8erEL8kOlCniyFYlZOrz cjazDDvaiw0U8RP+n4rt0eo5uSGTe1fuBWtP3knydLvqyWfuQD/VDNrgQr56IvibxWoa cJTnbF8r81H+i9juVY87dNeroob6xE0bGUs/aOKkY9euNJjKtim9Dz5jg0G6xJPibV+y /acQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :references:in-reply-to:mime-version:dkim-signature :arc-authentication-results; bh=0kLWQTfq5LAA1BnO2fp+afjjJWyP1LVL96/r5dLLiKk=; b=rfJpIJP1Yp3x3XnXbtIz54gzyguayM8BpKxoIa2+SdPFtwihew99TfGVyqULhC+a7P Bk07VN2YR4Md0guLWNQyP2MYLnYpjaNEVUxK7UsdwudwxZoX0fpDF7aWH5D0S997JVF9 UBJ5MhSuyDZ4M6YIz6eY6cJdpDTfWmSLUwHyYAPOIGivuRDGxnVfroUJvrlWBErmCAJj GPkgaggnHHuqOMj5J8uT/vsbAuJEim53V0aRJisIF++Vp1eCKDZSEsRpnZtdySvm1AtF e+katMf01tQhstGUJOztYs6Yh3cQWum3pecSE+4+1lYs8aRFomty3H8PfE4jrI40ITC6 QGWw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=fail header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=caONgYQv; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id n7-v6si2868857plp.363.2018.07.18.04.00.21; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 04:00:36 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=fail header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=caONgYQv; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730382AbeGRLgb (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 18 Jul 2018 07:36:31 -0400 Received: from mail-lj1-f196.google.com ([209.85.208.196]:44746 "EHLO mail-lj1-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726982AbeGRLga (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jul 2018 07:36:30 -0400 Received: by mail-lj1-f196.google.com with SMTP id q127-v6so3695036ljq.11 for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 03:59:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=0kLWQTfq5LAA1BnO2fp+afjjJWyP1LVL96/r5dLLiKk=; b=caONgYQvLhoNbe6yrfKgqHJtN192/2iMChyZF+KVEhfBa/nD645yUDqWxIQ8p3io9J lkuBuEMxOh1oS+y9ZSROhYyR1cH3oJFZyogBe9+NoKgFCbOQaNuy9p4WKdhbB/SLoI5b eBRzz6wq5Jnv7tzfb1Ml3PIcizsC6M/yqIp9UcxNN7M4A8Ja9QqJdejlxqFCWbVp1XUy rOdFZwR1cfQrVslMGOQAe/v9kxOAUYXtyDiHe5sfdQNitIX0QOWcbrpYmmEOb168KpfZ oqvNj/sFypMjWWylmaFJbLPtqgoTanFgFswUvdkqGjYnMvaTNn6ZViDX5sesEOmPFzT2 qJqw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=0kLWQTfq5LAA1BnO2fp+afjjJWyP1LVL96/r5dLLiKk=; b=oxydUAaNRGve0FicctEL5XDZNpi6H1qKgGWaIMegHG/piIu7wpe99Ilfx4c6L8ImUr cj/JUDi0nWmA/OTua0PxgRIYZJld9BqUD9DzL4kyxnjK0RQSjeHW8WM6I7+6A3DSTjgA ODJN4ncM+XsnCFtZ99ThT1qZWrh05V3/NCCLhHrQmKt/qXGi1IM1qsMK9FscE8gcH2eW UhYGDFokVsKJeVecEBR1MA/k6ToSfMMOQlnVpD5Yj04GUqLe5W5pNKphGMVD+Lu2ocY7 7SUqxGi/7h8mo2TGEzXxoLOM13qoYgNLvk130FEi0y/s9WbdNGuWcjcmpcbu/LhaslwS 7E5Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlGAQ0Xt6Q4llywWbSk+KOBNGihWkLaKhIBKw9cY+75bC/Ofk8P+ Bii5A9IEMPm+VXwE20U9ZnZBhXAzWT1U+a5TmhQ= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:998e:: with SMTP id w14-v6mr2976202lji.7.1531911548067; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 03:59:08 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a2e:41c1:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 03:59:07 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1531899055-29362-1-git-send-email-wangxiongfeng2@huawei.com> References: <1531899055-29362-1-git-send-email-wangxiongfeng2@huawei.com> From: Arnd Bergmann Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 12:59:07 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: _4nrKyBKtowWESGC3X8p5Xcu4ck Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] crypto: add IV generation templates To: Xiongfeng Wang Cc: Alasdair Kergon , Mike Snitzer , Herbert Xu , dm-devel@redhat.com, Linux Kernel Mailing List , Mark Brown , Jonathan Cameron , Ard Biesheuvel Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 9:30 AM, Xiongfeng Wang wrote: > > I tested the performance of software implemented ciphers before and after > applying this patchset. The performance didn't change much except for > slight regression when writting. The detail information is as follows. > > The command I used: > cryptsetup -y -c aes-xts-plain -s 256 --hash sha256 luksFormat /dev/sdd1 > cryptsetup -y -c aes-cbc-essiv:sha256 -s 256 --hash sha256 luksFormat /dev/sdd1 > cryptsetup -y -c aes-cbc-benbi -s 256 --hash sha256 luksFormat /dev/sdd1 > > cryptsetup luksOpen /dev/sdd1 crypt_fun > time dd if=/dev/mapper/crypt_fun of=/dev/null bs=1M count=500 iflag=direct > time dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/mapper/crypt_fun bs=1M count=500 oflag=direct > > Performance comparision: > -------------------------------------------------------- > algorithms | before applying | after applying > -------------------------------------------------------- > | read | write | read | write > -------------------------------------------------------- > aes-xts-plain | 145.34 | 145.09 | 145.89 | 144.2 > -------------------------------------------------------- > aes-cbc-essiv | 146.87 | 144.62 | 146.74 | 143.41 > -------------------------------------------------------- > aes-cbc-benbi | 146.03 | 144.74 | 146.77 | 144.46 > -------------------------------------------------------- Do you have any estimate of the expected gains for hardware implementations? Would it make sense to try out implementing aes-cbc-essiv on the ARMv8 crypto extensions? I see that Ard has done some prior work on aes-ccm in arch/arm64/crypto/aes-ce-ccm-* that (AFAICT) has a similar goal of avoiding overhead by combining the usual operations, so maybe the same can be done here. Arnd