Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A862C433EF for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 19:32:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231620AbhLGTg1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Dec 2021 14:36:27 -0500 Received: from sin.source.kernel.org ([145.40.73.55]:60158 "EHLO sin.source.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231629AbhLGTg1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Dec 2021 14:36:27 -0500 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sin.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98707CE1DEF for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 19:32:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9DCCBC341C3; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 19:32:53 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1638905573; bh=MYx2kWdoRIjjodPYgxf9scwYAvj4mEPyOf7GhfBbw14=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:From; b=hrYCfbmd2d9dwXk4+z1SwkmZLhsRMgTe/8Xo0XakzcWgcStrU8CQG3+SwejQfTl/7 omC3CcIPWahi2Hnk/98CgOvMD9I8v6u8SpJETWJsRB63ABHxarfaqEWOoMxxEE4Qxg toV1fBVaiNLmVErFY3SUPP9gVIFrrOaFEH3bVc44QlS9NnfaNqLTymd0rGTIg1/P6g RnDE2cp9QYN9+YJ/O6swA+pSreU7MKBmSIb7qEezp31D1Tcxdc+lQE6p9BOLz0BTYD faJ2HmxRqDy497Smc+BgvZdW+njOpgnIaXDuqrdXc0MLCPbhwT6gTrQUA3ny4aKs57 xcH4Neo8d3p5Q== Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2021 11:32:52 -0800 From: Jakub Kicinski To: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org Cc: Herbert Xu , Sabrina Dubroca Subject: x86 AES crypto alignment Message-ID: <20211207113252.162701ed@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org Hi! The x86 AES crypto (gcm(aes)) requires 16B alignment which is hard to achieve in networking. Is there any reason for this? On any moderately recent Intel platform aligned and unaligned vmovdq should have the same performance (reportedly). I'll hack it up and do some testing, but I thought it's worth asking first..